Wearable technology in the management of complex chronic illness: preliminary survey results on self-reported outcomes.
Sawyer, Abbey, Preston, Rory, Leeming, Harry et al. · Frontiers in digital health · 2025 · DOI
Quick Summary
This study looked at whether a smartphone app with a wearable armband helps people with ME/CFS and Long COVID manage their energy and symptoms. Over 1,300 people with these conditions used the app and answered questions about whether it helped them. Most people who used the app for at least a month reported feeling like they better understood their energy limits and how to manage daily activities, though some improvements may have simply come from tracking their own experience over time.
Why It Matters
Energy management is a critical challenge for people with ME/CFS, particularly given post-exertional malaise vulnerability. This study provides preliminary evidence that accessible digital tools may help patients track and understand their individual symptom patterns and energy limitations, potentially supporting behavioral strategies central to managing the condition. The work supports further investigation into whether such tools can improve real-world health outcomes.
Observed Findings
Among users with ≥30 days of data (n not specified), 77% self-reported improvements associated with app use
85% reported feeling somewhat (53%) or significantly (32%) improved
94% reported achieving a better understanding of their personal energy budget
Participants were predominantly female (82%), with average age 46 years
ME/CFS-only diagnosis was most common (42%), followed by Long COVID-only (31%)
Inferred Conclusions
Home-monitoring mobile applications are feasible and acceptable for motivated individuals with energy-limiting chronic illnesses
Wearable-based tracking may support improved self-understanding of energy budgets and symptom patterns in ME/CFS and Long COVID
Future research must employ randomized controlled trials with comparison groups to determine whether observed benefits represent true intervention effects versus improvements from self-monitoring or natural disease variation
Remaining Questions
Does the app produce clinically meaningful improvements in objective health outcomes (e.g., activity capacity, quality of life measures) compared to standard care or self-monitoring without the app?
Which patient subgroups benefit most from this approach, and what adherence rates persist beyond the 30-day minimum threshold?
What This Study Does Not Prove
This study does not prove that the app caused improvements in patient outcomes—participants' condition may have improved due to self-awareness from tracking alone, or other external factors unrelated to the app. Without a control group comparison, it remains unclear whether the app provides benefits beyond what patients would experience from simply monitoring themselves over time. The findings represent self-reported perceptions rather than objective clinical outcomes or long-term health effects.