Tracking Persistent Symptoms in Scotland (TraPSS): A Longitudinal Prospective Cohort Study of COVID-19 Recovery After Mild Acute Infection (preprint)

Background: COVID-19 disease results in disparate responses between individuals and has led to the emergence of Long-COVID, characterized by persistent and cyclical symptomology. To understand the complexity of Long-COVID, the importance of symptom surveillance and prospective longitudinal studies is evident. Methods: A 9-month longitudinal prospective cohort study was conducted within Scotland (n=287), using a mobile app to determine the proportion of recovered individuals, those with persistent symptoms, common symptoms, and associations with gender and age. Results: 3.1% of participants experienced symptoms at month 9, meeting the criteria for Long-COVID, as defined by the NICE terminology. Fatigue, cough, and muscle pain were the most common symptoms at baseline, with fatigue persisting the longest, while symptoms like cough improved rapidly. Older age increased the likelihood of reporting pain and cognitive impairment. Female gender increased the likelihood of headaches and post-exertional malaise (PEM), and increased recovery time from fatigue and PEM. Conclusions: The majority of people fully recover from acute COVID-19, albeit often slowly. Age and gender play a role in symptom burden and recovery rates, emphasizing the need for tailored approaches to Long-COVID management. Further analysis is required to determine the characteristics of the individuals still reporting ongoing symptoms months after initial infection to identify risk factors and potential predictors for the development of Long-COVID.

A Scoping Review of Pacing for Management of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS): Lessons Learned for the Long COVID Pandemic (preprint)

Background: Controversy over treatment for people with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a barrier to appropriate treatment. Energy management or pacing is a prominent coping strategy for people with ME/CFS that involves regulating activity to avoid post exertional malaise (PEM), the worsening of symptoms after an activity. Until now, characteristics of pacing, and the effects on patients symptoms had not been systematically reviewed. This is problematic as the most common approach to pacing, pacing prescription, and the pooled efficacy of pacing was unknown. Collating evidence may help advise those suffering with similar symptoms, including long COVID, as practitioners would be better informed on methodological approaches to adopt, pacing implementation, and expected outcomes. Objectives: In this scoping review of the literature, we aggregated type of, and outcomes of, pacing in people with ME/CFS. Eligibility criteria: Original investigations concerning pacing were considered in participants with ME/CFS. Sources of evidence: Six electronic databases (PubMed, Scholar, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL]) were searched; and websites MEPedia, Action for ME, and ME Action were also searched for grey literature. Methods: A scoping review was conducted. Review selection and characterisation was performed by two independent reviewers using pretested forms. Results: Authors reviewed 177 titles and abstracts, resulting in included 17 studies: three randomised control trials (RCTs); one uncontrolled trial; one interventional case series; one retrospective observational study; two prospective observational studies; four cross-sectional observational studies; and five cross-sectional analytical studies. Studies included variable designs, durations, and outcome measures. In terms of pacing administration, studies used educational sessions and diaries for activity monitoring. Eleven studies reported benefits of pacing, four studies reported no effect, and two studies reported a detrimental effect in comparison to the control group. Conclusions: Highly variable study designs and outcome measures, allied to poor to fair methodological quality resulted in heterogenous findings and highlights the requirement for more research examining pacing. Looking to the long COVID pandemic, future studies should be RCTs utilising objectively quantified digitised pacing, over a longer duration of examination, using the core outcome set for patient reported outcome measures.