Reflections on patient engagement by patient partners: how it can go wrong.

As six patient partners in Canada, we aim to contribute to learning and to provide an opportunity to reflect on patient engagement (PE) in research and healthcare environments. Patient engagement refers to "meaningful and active collaboration in governance, priority setting, conducting research and knowledge translation" with patient partners as members of teams, rather than participants in research or clinical care. While much has been written about the benefits of patient engagement, it is important to accurately document and share what we term 'patient engagement gone wrong.' These examples have been anonymized and presented as four statements: patient partners as a check mark, unconscious bias towards patient partners, lack of support to fully include patient partners, and lack of recognizing the vulnerability of patient partners. The examples provided are intended to demonstrate that patient engagement gone wrong is more common than discussed openly, and to simply bring this to light. This article is not intending to lay blame, rather to evolve and improve patient engagement initiatives. We ask those who interact with patient partners to reflect so we can all work towards improving patient engagement. Lean into the discomfort with these conversations as that is the only way to change these all too recognizable examples, and which will lead to better project outcomes and experiences for all team members.

We are six patient partners in Canada who aim to contribute to learning and to provide an opportunity to reflect on patient engagement (PE) in research and healthcare environments. Patient engagement refers to "meaningful and active collaboration in governance, priority setting, conducting research and knowledge translation," where patient partners are members of the teams, rather than participants in research or those seeking clinical care. It appears more has been written on the benefits rather than the risks of patient engagement and we feel it is important to document and share what we call 'patient engagement gone wrong.' We have anonymized these examples and sorted them into four statements: patient partners as a check mark, unconscious bias towards patient partners, lack of support to fully include patient partners, and lack of recognizing the vulnerability of patient partners. These statements and their examples are meant to show that patient engagement gone wrong is more common than discussed openly, and to simply bring this to light. With this commentary, we do not mean to lay blame, and instead wish to evolve and improve patient engagement initiatives. We ask those who interact with patient partners to reflect so we can all work towards improving patient engagement. Lean into the discomfort with these examples, as that is the only way to change these all too recognizable statements, and which will lead to better project outcomes and experiences for all team members.

A new clinical challenge: supporting patients coping with the long-term effects of COVID-19.

Mental Health Practitioners (MHPs) have a unique opportunity to provide resources and support to those suffering from Long COVID (LC), the post infectious illness that often follows an acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. In working with these individuals, MHPs can learn from the experiences of patients with another post-infectious disease known as myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). ME/CFS was once thought to be a psychologically mediated disorder caused by deconditioning and the fear of exertion following a precipitating event such as a viral infection. Research now shows that LC and ME/CFS are biomedical, multisystem, complex physiologic diseases. This article provides a framework to MHPs for the treatment of LC patients using knowledge derived from three decades of research on ME/CFS.

Humility and Acceptance: Working Within Our Limits With Long COVID and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

SYNOPSIS: The term long COVID was coined by patients to describe the long-term consequences of COVID-19. One year into the pandemic, it was clear that all patients-those hospitalized with COVID-19 and those who lived with the disease in the community-were at risk of developing debilitating sequelae that would impact their quality of life. Patients with long COVID asked for rehabilitation. Many of them, including previously healthy and fit clinicians, tried to fight postviral fatigue with exercise-based rehabilitation. We observed a growing number of patients with long COVID who experienced adverse effects from exercise therapy and symptoms strikingly similar to those of myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME). Community-based physical therapists, including those in private practice, unaware of safety issues, are preparing to help an influx of patients with long COVID. In this editorial, we expose growing concerns about long COVID and ME. We issue safety recommendations for rehabilitation and share resources to improve care for those with postviral illnesses. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(5):197-200. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.0106.