An interventional study of Lightning Process and Activity Pacing in Long COVID, sponsored by McMaster University. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 65 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-07-13.
Sponsored by McMaster University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Long COVID affects about 6 in 100 people after a COVID-19 infection. It can cause ongoing problems like ongoing tiredness, muscle pain, and "brain fog." We know very little about which treatments might be helpful for long COVID.
The goal of this trial is to compare two treatments for people with long COVID to try to manage their symptoms. The main question is to assess whether the Lightning Process is effective for people living with long COVID compared to activity pacing. Each person will be placed into one of the two groups randomly (by chance, like flipping a coin). Activity pacing helps people balance rest and daily activities. The Lightning Process teaches ways to change thought patterns and body responses to symptoms. We will include 100 adults with long COVID. Everything will be done online, including filling out surveys about health and daily life. The goal is to find out which approach helps people feel better and improve their daily activities.
The COVID-19 pandemic presented an unprecedented global health crisis, affecting millions globally and causing significant health and economic consequences. Although most people recover from acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, a substantial minority, approximately 6 to 15%, develop persistent symptoms that last for months and impair daily function, commonly referred to as post-COVID-19 condition or long COVID. Common symptoms of long COVID include fatigue, myalgia, dyspnea, sleep disturbance, and cognitive dysfunction ("brain fog"). The prevalence of long COVID is difficult to establish because most symptoms are nonspecific and many data sources rely on study designs that cannot confidently attribute symptoms to prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Despite this uncertainty, converging evidence points to a large global burden, with >65 million people estimated to be living with functional limitations attributed to long COVID. The Lightning Process (LP), is a mind-body training program that is hypothesized to help individuals to develop a conscious influence on their level of functioning, using practical tools such as discussion, gentle movement and meditation-like techniques. Emerging evidence suggests that gradually re-engaging long COVID patients in physical activation and modifying unhelpful beliefs may promote recovery. There are currently no established treatments for long COVID, and patients often use activity pacing to manage their symptoms. The purpose of this trial is to establish the efficacy and safety of LP vs. activity pacing in adults living with long COVID. We hypothesize that in our trial, people randomized to LP will report greater improvement in fatigue compared to those receiving activity pacing. Our trial will enroll people living with long COVID who are motivated and show willingness to change their condition through intervention. The trial will assess whether, among adults living with long COVID (post COVID-19 condition) and persistent, function limiting symptoms, LP improves fatigue and other patient important outcomes, compared to activity pacing.
The primary objective is to assess the effect of LP vs. activity pacing on fatigue among adults with long COVID.
The secondary objectives are to assess the effect of LP vs. activity pacing on
Both LP and pacing interventions span 26 weeks. Patients assigned to the LP intervention will complete a brief preparatory phase, then attend three consecutive core sessions. The LP protocol includes two follow-up calls one week apart and a booster call at week 26. Patients assigned to the pacing intervention complete 15 sessions over 24 weeks-four weekly sessions, then sessions every two weeks until week 26.
Participants will complete outcome measures at 6 months, coinciding with the immediate the end of the intervention, and at 9 and 12 months. The post-treatment time point estimates the proximal effect of LP compared to pacing, where contamination is lowest, co-interventions are least likely to diverge across arms, and any harms (e.g., post-exertional worsening) are most plausibly related to the assigned strategy.
520 studies on the registry are indexed under Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome; 186 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 100 is above the median of 60 across 361 interventional studies indexed under Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome.
Browse Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome studies →McMaster University is the lead sponsor of 720 studies on the registry; 124 are open to participants now.
Of its 6 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 2 (33%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
The inclusion criteria for participants are:
Exclusion Criteria:
The exclusion criteria are:
Lightning Process is a mind body intervention that focusses on identifying and interrupting negative thoughts that may affect fatigue.
Behavioral: Lightning Process
Activity pacing is a self-management strategy that balances activity and rest to manage fatigue, allowing individuals to maintain consistent energy levels throughout the day.
Other: Activity Pacing
LP is a mind body intervention which is delivered over 3 consecutive days to individuals or in groups via video technology. The sessions are approximately 4 hours long. Experienced LP practitioners will deliver the LP intervention remotely and individually. The intervention is comprised of a preparation phase, core sessions, and follow-up. Preparation consists of an audio home-study module (about 4 hours total) and about 1 hour of preparatory coaching by telephone or videoconference in the days to weeks before delivery of the LP intervention to orient participants to the approach and address any questions.
Activity Pacing, a self-management strategy that balances activity and rest to manage fatigue, allowing individuals to maintain consistent energy levels throughout the day. The aim of activity pacing is to avoid symptom exacerbations whilst achieving as much as possible with limited energy. Pacing focusses on developing awareness not only of the symptoms but also more subtle indicators that herald a future exacerbation of symptoms (listening to your body) and becoming aware of effect of activity or lack of rest on disability. Senior occupational therapy students will deliver activity pacing remotely and individually by videoconference.
Fatigue (Checklist Individual Strength-Fatigue)
The primary outcome will be the mean change in fatigue scores between Lightning Process and activity pacing group at 12 months post randomization. This will be assessed on the fatigue domain of the 8-item Checklist Individual Strength (CIS-fatigue) at 12 months follow-up. The CIS-fatigue domain consists of 8 items with a total score ranging from 8 to 56, with higher scores indicating more severe fatigue.
Time frame: 12 months
Respiratory function (Dyspnea-12)
Change in respiratory functioning will be assessed with the Dyspnea-12 (D-12) Scale which measures the current level of a patient's breathlessness severity, incorporating both physical and affective aspects, and does not depend on activity limitation. Each item scored from 0-3, for a total score range of 0-36. Higher scores indicate worse dyspnea.
Time frame: 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months
Post Exertional Malaise (De Paul Symptom Questionnaire)
Change in post exertional malaise (PEM) will be measured using a brief questionnaire derived from De Paul Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ). It is a 5-item self-report tool that evaluates common symptoms of long COVID, including worsening after physical or mental activity, recovery duration and activity intolerance. Each item is scored 0-4 on 5-point Likert scale. A score of ≥2 for frequency and ≥2 for severity on any item suggests PEM.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months
Daily Pain (Brief Pain Inventory Short Form)
Change in pain will be assessed using Brief Pain Inventory short form (BPI-SF). This is a 9-item questionnaire used to evaluate the severity of a patient's pain and the impact of their pain on daily functioning. The BPI-SF evaluates pain severity at its worst, least, and average during the previous week, as well as current pain level, with 0 representing no pain and 10 the worst pain imaginable.
Time frame: 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months
Fatigue (Checklist Individual Strength-Fatigue)
Change in fatigue scores will be measured at 6 and 9 months post randomization. This will be assessed on the fatigue domain of the 8-item CIS-fatigue scale at 6 and 9 months follow-up.
Time frame: 6 months and 9 months
Physical function (SF-12)
Change in physical functioning will be measured using Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) scale, a 12-item questionnaire that assesses physical and mental health status.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months
Health related quality of life (EuroQol-5 Dimensions)
Health related quality of life will be measured using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) scale that provides a generic measure of health for clinical and economic appraisal. Its a continuous (scale 0-100). Higher scores relate to better health.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months
Severity of somatic symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-15)
Change in somatic symptoms will be measured using Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15) that screens for somatization concerns and monitors symptom severity. Its a continuous (scale 0-30). Higher scores relate to greater somatic symptom severity.
Time frame: 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months
Functional impairment (Work and Social Adjustment Scale)
Change in functional impairment will be measured through Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS) scale. Its a 5-item continuous scale (0-40) of functional impairment attributable to an identified problem. Higher scores relate to severely impaired.
Time frame: 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months
Adverse Events (AEs)
To ensure participant safety, adverse events (AEs) will be documented at each follow-up visit.
Time frame: Up to 12 months
Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
To ensure participant safety, serious adverse events (SAEs) will be documented at each follow-up visit.
Time frame: Up to 12 months
No study locations are listed for this record.
Plan to share: Yes — The study protocol will be published and publicly available. We will share the de-identified data with investigators who have ethics approval for the specific secondary analysis and sign a data sharing agreement. Due to privacy concerns, the complete data files will not be shared online.
Supporting information: Study protocol
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Jul 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
McMaster University