Leach, Helen, Eccles, Abi, Chew-Graham, Carolyn A et al. · BJGP open · 2025 · DOI
This study asked 13 people with ME/CFS and fibromyalgia about their experiences using phone and video appointments with their doctors during and after 2020. Patients said the most important thing was feeling believed and listened to by their doctor. While remote appointments had some benefits (like being easier when symptoms were bad), many people found it harder to communicate without face-to-face visits, though having a trusted, familiar doctor made a big difference.
As remote consulting becomes standard in primary care, understanding ME/CFS and fibromyalgia patients' needs is critical for ensuring equitable care delivery. This study provides patient voices on what works and what doesn't in remote settings, informing healthcare policy and practice. The findings highlight that therapeutic relationships and being believed—not just technological access—are central to good outcomes for people with these complex conditions.
This study does not prove that remote consulting is inferior or superior to in-person care overall, nor does it establish causal relationships between specific consultation modalities and health outcomes. The small sample size and self-selected participants mean findings may not generalize to all ME/CFS and fibromyalgia patients. This is descriptive research capturing experiences, not a controlled trial measuring clinical effectiveness.
About the PEM badge: “PEM required” means post-exertional malaise was an explicit required diagnostic criterion for participant inclusion in this study — not that PEM was studied, observed, or discussed. Studies using criteria that do not require PEM (e.g. Fukuda, Oxford) are tagged “PEM not required”. How the atlas works →
Spotted an error in this entry? Report it →