Category: Medical Care

Obstructions for quality care experienced by patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS)–a case study

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: To explore obstructions for quality care from experiences by patients suffering from chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS).

METHODS: Qualitative case study with data drawn from a group meeting, written answers to a questionnaire and a follow-up meeting. Purposeful sample of 10 women and 2 men of various ages, recruited from a local patient organization, assumed to have a special awareness for quality care.

RESULTS: CFS patients said that lack of acknowledgement could be even worse than the symptoms. They wanted their doctors to ask questions, listen to them and take them seriously, instead of behaving degrading. Many participants felt that the doctors psychologized too much, or trivialized the symptoms. Participants described how doctors’ lack of knowledge about the condition would lead to long-term uncertainty or maltreatment. Even with doctors who were supportive, it would usually take months and sometimes years until a medical conclusion would be reached, or other disorders were ruled out. Increased physical activity had been recommend, but most of the informants experienced that this made them worse.

CONCLUSION: Current medical scepticism and ignorance regarding CFS shapes the context of medical care and the illness experiences of CFS patients, who may feel they neither get a proper assessment nor management.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: CFS patients’ reports about patronizing attitudes and ignorance among doctors call for development of evidence based strategies and empowerment of patients, acknowledging the patients’ understanding of symptoms and the complex nature of the disease. The NICE guidelines emphasize the need of patient participation and shared decision-making.

Comment in: Qualitative methods in communication and patient education research. [Patient Educ Couns. 2008]

 

Source: Gilje AM, Söderlund A, Malterud K. Obstructions for quality care experienced by patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS)–a case study. Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Oct;73(1):36-41. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.04.001. Epub 2008 May 16. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18486415

 

NICE behaviour: ME guideline is unworkable

Comment on: Diagnosis and management of chronic fatigue syndrome or myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy): summary of NICE guidance. [BMJ. 2007]

 

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) recommends that everyone with mild or moderate myalgic encephalopathy/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) should be offered a course of either cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) or graded exercise therapy (GET).1

This is despite published evidence remaining weak (especially for group CBT) and inconsistent 2. Patient evidence submitted to the chief medical officer’s report concluded that CBT produced “no change” in 67% of cases and made the condition “worse” in 26% of cases.3 Around 50% of respondents reported that inappropriate exercise therapy had also made their condition “worse.”3

When the NICE estimate on prevalence is used this controversial recommendation will affect some 200 000 people. A one to one course of CBT covering 12 to 16 sessions will cost well over £1500. The cost of a professionally supervised exercise therapy programme is also likely to be substantial.

So where is around £300 million of new money going to come from at a time when very limited funding for some of the newly established NHS clinical services for people with ME/CFS is now being cut?4 And where are all the therapists going to come from? Those already in post often cannot even cope with their current workload.

These are important questions that I raised at a NICE implementation and planning meeting in October 2006—but nobody from NICE could provide a convincing answer. These recommendations are going to be of no value whatsoever to many people with ME/CFS. They are also going to be impossible to implement owing to a lack of both funding and human resources.

You can read the rest of this comment here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1976494/

 

Source: Shepherd CB. NICE behaviour: ME guideline is unworkable. BMJ. 2007 Sep 15;335(7619):528. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1976494/ (Full article)

 

Diagnosis and management of chronic fatigue syndrome or myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy): summary of NICE guidance

Data from other countries indicate that chronic fatigue syndrome (also known as myalgic encephalomyelitis or myalgic encephalopathy) (CFS/ME) is relatively common (affecting at least 0.2-0.4% of the population), although good epidemiological data for the United Kingdom are lacking. Many different potential aetiologies for CFS/ME have been investigated, including neurological, endocrine, immunological, genetic, psychiatric, and infectious, but the aetiology cannot yet be fully explained. CFS/ME can cause prolonged illness and disability and substantially affect patients and their families. Although most patients have mild or moderate symptoms, some have severe CFS/ME and are housebound or even unable to move from their bed. Uncertainties about diagnosis and management may exacerbate the impact of symptoms, and patients often encounter delays in diagnosis and difficulty accessing information, support, and potentially helpful therapies.1 This article summarises the most recent guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) on diagnosing and managing this condition.2

 

Source: Baker R, Shaw EJ. Diagnosis and management of chronic fatigue syndrome or myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy): summary of NICE guidance. BMJ. 2007 Sep 1;335(7617):446-8. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1962830/ (Full article)

 

Chronic fatigue syndrome or myalgic encephalomyelitis

Comment on: Diagnosis and management of chronic fatigue syndrome or myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy): summary of NICE guidance. [BMJ. 2007]

The uncertainty inherent in making a diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is reflected by the variety of names (such as myalgic encephalomyelitis; ME) it has been given. The names reflect the hope that such labels can impose some certainty where little exists. Many doctors are reluctant to make a diagnosis of CFS, with half not even believing it exists.1 The consequences of this uncertainty and reluctance have been that patients hear mixed messages and often receive poor, if any, care.2 It is therefore a welcome relief that the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has just published clinical guidelines on the diagnosis and management of this disease.3 In this week’s BMJ, Baker and Shaw summarise the guidelines.4

You can read the rest of this comment here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1962896/

 

Source: White P, Murphy M, Moss J, Armstrong G, Spencer P. Chronic fatigue syndrome or myalgic encephalomyelitis. BMJ. 2007 Sep 1;335(7617):411-2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1962896/ (Full article)

 

Identity and coping experiences in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: a synthesis of qualitative studies

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: To provide insight into patients’ and doctors’ experiences with CFS.

METHODS: We compiled available qualitative studies and applied meta-ethnography to identify and translate across the studies. Analysis provided second-order interpretation of the original findings and developed third-order constructs from a line of arguments.

RESULTS: Twenty qualitative studies on CFS experiences were identified. Symptom experiences and the responses from significant others could jeopardise the patients’ senses of identity. They felt severely ill, yet blamed and dismissed. Patients’ beliefs and causal attributions oppose the doctor’s understanding of the condition. For the patient, getting a diagnosis and knowing more was necessary for recovery. Doctors were reluctant towards the diagnosis, and struggle to maintain professional authority. For patients, experience of discreditation could lead to withdrawal and behavioural disengagement.

CONCLUSION: The identities of CFS patients are challenged when the legitimacy of their illness is questioned. This significant burden adds to a loss of previously established identity and makes the patient more vulnerable than just suffering from the symptoms. CFS patients work hard to cope with their condition by knowing more, keeping a distance to protect themselves and learning more about their limits.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Doctors can support patients’ coping by supporting the strong sides of the patients instead of casting doubt upon them.

 

Source: Larun L, Malterud K. Identity and coping experiences in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: a synthesis of qualitative studies. Patient Educ Couns. 2007 Dec;69(1-3):20-8. Epub 2007 Aug 14. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17698311

 

With the back to the future

Health care is confronted regularly with patients we understand little of and where our advice is inadequate. Chronic fatigue syndrome is one such condition. It is now more important to think than to summarize the discouraging research findings that have emerged so far.

You can read the rest of this comment here:  http://tidsskriftet.no/2006/10/kommentar/med-ryggen-mot-fremtiden

 

Source: Bruusgaard D. With the back to the future. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2006 Oct 19;126(20):2686. [Article in Norwegian] http://tidsskriftet.no/2006/10/kommentar/med-ryggen-mot-fremtiden (Full article)

 

GMC must consider case against paediatricians who suspected parents of fabricating child’s illness

A couple suspected of fabricating their daughter’s illness and threatened with having her taken into care have won a High Court ruling that the General Medical Council must reconsider their complaint against the two paediatricians who raised the concerns.

The girl, now 15 years old, was eventually diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome. The local council agreed to withdraw the care proceedings and was ordered to pay the family’s costs after an independent expert appointed by the court and the doctor treating the girl made the diagnosis.

Her father, named only as Mr F to protect his daughter’s identity, lodged a complaint with the GMC against the paediatricians, who were named in the High Court judgment as Dr A and Dr B.

Mr F’s complaint included an allegation that the doctors had changed their minds and accepted that chronic fatigue syndrome was the correct diagnosis but had not immediately informed the local authority or the court hearing the case.

The charges were drawn up and the case went to the GMC’s preliminary proceedings committee (PPC), but, in July 2004, that committee decided not to refer the case to the professional conduct committee and threw it out.

Mr F sought a judicial review, arguing that the allegations were sufficient, if proved, to support a finding of serious professional misconduct. The GMC was willing to send the case back to the PPC, but the two doctors intervened as interested parties to oppose the application.

Mr Justice Sullivan ruled that the committee had failed to deal with the allegations and should have made further inquiries. He said that the charges as formulated had raised a specific allegation that the doctors had engaged in deceitful conduct, which had to be dealt with in the committee’s reasoning, and sent the case back to the committee.

A spokesman for the GMC said, “We note the decision handed down by Mr Justice Sullivan. The case will be referred back to the PPC for consideration.”

You can read the rest of this article here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1459583/

Source: Dyer C. GMC must consider case against paediatricians who suspected parents of fabricating child’s illness. BMJ. 2006 May 13;332(7550):1110. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1459583/ (Full article)

Primary healthcare provision and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: a survey of patients’ and General Practitioners’ beliefs

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: The current study was conducted as part of a research project into the evaluation and assessment of healthcare provision and education in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). One aim of the study was the development of informative and educational literature for both General Practitioners (GP) and sufferers. Issues such as diagnosis, management and treatment of the syndrome should be included in information booklets written by healthcare professionals. It was important to begin the process by assessing the level of specialist knowledge that existed in typical GP surgeries. This data would then be compared to data from CFS patients.

METHOD: 197 survey booklets were sent to CFS sufferers from an existing research panel. The patients approached for the purpose of the study had been recruited onto the panel following diagnosis of their illness at a specialised CFS outpatient clinic in South Wales. A further 120 booklets were sent to GP surgeries in the Gwent Health Authority region in Wales.

RESULTS: Results from the study indicate that the level of specialist knowledge of CFS in primary care remains low. Only half the GP respondents believed that the condition actually exists.

CONCLUSION: Steps are recommended to increase the knowledge base by compiling helpful and informative material for GPs and patient groups.

 

Source: Thomas MA, Smith AP. Primary healthcare provision and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: a survey of patients’ and General Practitioners’ beliefs. BMC Fam Pract. 2005 Dec 13;6:49. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1325235/ (Full article)

 

Illnesses you have to fight to get: facts as forces in uncertain, emergent illnesses

Abstract:
Chronic fatigue syndrome and multiple chemical sensitivity are two clusters of illnesses that are pervaded by medical, social and political uncertainty. This article examines how facts are talked about and experienced in struggles over these emergent, contested illnesses in the US. Based principally on a large archive of internet newsgroup postings, and also on fieldwork and on published debates, it finds that (1) sufferers describe their experiences of being denied healthcare and legitimacy through bureaucratic categories of exclusion as dependent upon their lack of biological facts; (2) institutions manage these exclusions rhetorically through exploiting the open-endedness of science to deny efficacy to new facts; (3) collective patient action responds by archiving the systematic nature of these exclusions and developing counter-tactics. The result is the maintenance of these very expensive struggles for all involved.

 

Source: Dumit J. Illnesses you have to fight to get: facts as forces in uncertain, emergent illnesses. Soc Sci Med. 2006 Feb;62(3):577-90. Epub 2005 Aug 8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16085344

 

Significance of the chronic fatigue syndrome in rehabilitation medicine–status and perspectives

Abstract:

It appears that from a clinical point of view chronic exhaustion or fatigue is an important factor in rehabilitation. This is, however, first of all a phenomenon that can be described as a function in accordance with the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (JCF), caused by chronic illnesses or chronic excessive stress. The clinical and sociomedical ranking of chronic fatigue or exhaustion in respect of rehabilitation was discussed in the framework of a Workshop at the 12th Rehabilitation Science Colloquium, 2003 from the viewpoints of psychiatric rehabilitation, methodology, sociology and practical rehabilitation, and conclusions for future research were drawn. The definition of chronic fatigue is first of all mainly based on the feeling of chronic tiredness but also on phenomena of disturbed concentration, physical discomfort, headache and disorders of “drive” and mood.

A psychiatric diagnosis linked with symptoms of chronic fatigue is neurasthenia, which is arrived at according to precisely defined criteria. Depressive disorder is one of the most important differential diagnoses in this sphere. Examinations by general practitioners revealed that about 90 % of the patients who had been diagnosed as suffering from psychovegetative disorders completely agreed with the diagnosis of neurasthenia. Neurasthenia resulted more often in work disability periods than disorders of somatisation and other psychosomatic diagnoses. Basing on the “IRES” scale “vital exhaustion”, singular of even serious changes become evident in about 50 % to 90 % of the patients undergoing rehabilitation, depending on their individual range of indications. As was to be expected, the majority of pathologic findings concerns patients undergoing psychosomatic rehabilitation, since in such cases there is an overlapping with symptoms of psychosomatic diseases.

It is, however, remarkable that also in somatically oriented orthopaedic rehabilitation symptoms of fatigue are seen in up to 50 % of the patients. Preliminary studies have shown that these symptoms can be definitely ameliorated within the rehabilitation framework, although pathological signs are still abundantly apparent in follow-up examinations. Markedly severe degrees of “vital exhaustion” and “vocational exhaustion” are also seen in rheumatology patients undergoing somatic rehabilitation. This agrees with case history details related by many female and male patients.

Hence, it appears necessary to adapt rehabilitative intervention to both the psychovegetative and the medical behavioural aspects of this symptom. Scientific classification of the entire sphere of chronic fatigue in respect of rehabilitation requires classification of the relevant functions within the ICF framework. To this end it would be necessary to conduct patient inquiries within cross-sectional studies on the one hand and, on the other, a systematic consensus process among experts would have to be used for allocation to the relevant functions. This is the basis for development of suitable assessment tools for use in prospective studies in order to systematically evaluate the impact on functions and especially their effects on activities and participation.

 

Source: Gutenbrunner C, Linden M, Gerdes N, Ehlebracht-König I, Grosch E. [Significance of the chronic fatigue syndrome in rehabilitation medicine–status and perspectives]. Rehabilitation (Stuttg). 2005 Jun;44(3):176-85. [Article in German] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15933954