Screening for prolonged fatigue syndromes: validation of the SOFA scale

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: The identification of syndromes characterised by persistent and disabling mental and/or physical fatigue is of renewed interest in psychiatric epidemiology. This report details the development of two specific instruments: the SOFA/CFS for identification of patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) in specialist clinics and the SOFA/GP for identification of prolonged fatigue syndromes (PFS) in community and primary care settings.

METHODS: Patients with clinical diagnoses of CFS (n = 770) and consecutive attenders at primary care (n = 1593) completed various self-report questionnaires to assess severity of current fatigue-related symptoms and other common somatic and psychological symptoms. Quality receiver operating characteristic curves were used to derive appropriate cut-off scores for each of the instruments. Comparisons with other self-report measures of anxiety, depression and somatic distress are noted. Various multivariate statistical modelling techniques [latent class analysis (LCA), longitudinal LCA] were utilised to define the key features of PFS and describe its longitudinal characteristics.

RESULTS: The SOFA/CFS instrument performs well in specialist samples likely to contain a high proportion of patients with CFS disorders. Cut-off scores of either 1/2 or 2/3 can be used, depending on whether the investigators wish to preferentially emphasise false-negatives or false-positives. Patients from these settings can be thought of as consisting not only of those with a large number of unexplained medical symptoms, but also those with rather specific musculoskeletal and pain syndromes. The SOFA/GP instrument has potential cut-off scores of 1/2 or 2/3, with the latter preferred as it actively excludes all non-PFS cases (sensitivity = 81%, specificity = 100%). Patients with these syndromes in the community represent broader sets of underlying classes, with the emergence of not only musculoskeletal and multisymptomatic disorders, but also persons characterised by significant cognitive subjective impairment. Twelve-month longitudinal analyses of the primary care sample indicated that the underlying class structure was preserved over time. Comparisons with other measures of psychopathology indicated the relative independence of these constructs from conventional notions of anxiety and depression.

CONCLUSIONS: The SOFA/GP instrument (which is considerably modified from the SOFA/CFS in terms of anchor points for severity and chronicity) is preferred for screening in primary care and community settings. Patients with PFS and CFS present a range of psychopathology that differs in its underlying structure, cross-sectionally and longitudinally, from coventional notions of anxiety and depression.

 

Source: Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Hickie IB, Wilson AJ, Davenport TA, Lloyd AR, Wakefield D. Screening for prolonged fatigue syndromes: validation of the SOFA scale. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2000 Oct;35(10):471-9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11127722

 

Fatigue rating scales: an empirical comparison

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: There has been limited research comparing the efficacy of different fatigue rating scales for use with individuals with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). This investigation explored relationships between two commonly-used fatigue rating scales in CFS research, the Fatigue Scale and the Fatigue Severity Scale. Theoretically, these scales have been described as measuring different aspects of the fatigue construct. The Fatigue Scale was developed as a measure of the severity of specific fatigue-related symptoms, while the Fatigue Severity Scale was designed to assess functional outcomes related to fatigue.

METHODS: Associations of these scales with the eight definitional symptoms of CFS and with eight domains of functional disability were examined separately in: (1) an overall sample of individuals with a wide range of fatigue severity and symptomatology; (2) a subsample of individuals with CFS-like symptomatology, and, (3) a subsample of healthy controls.

RESULTS: Findings revealed that both scales are appropriate and useful measures of fatigue-related symptomatology and disability within a general population of individuals with varying levels of fatigue. However, the Fatigue Severity Scale appears to represent a more accurate and comprehensive measure of fatigue-related severity, symptomatology, and functional disability for individuals with CFS-like symptomatology.

 

Source: Taylor RR, Jason LA, Torres A. Fatigue rating scales: an empirical comparison. Psychol Med. 2000 Jul;30(4):849-56. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11037093

 

The development of the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Attitudes Test. A psychometric analysis

Abstract:

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) is characterized by debilitating symptoms including persistent or relapsing fatigue. As a result of CFS, some individuals experience significant stigma that is attached to this illness. Many medical professionals are skeptical of the validity of the illness, and employers often fail to appreciate the seriousness of the symptoms. Although negative attitudes greatly affect the lives of individuals with CFS, there is presently no measurement of attitudes toward this illness and people who have CFS. The purpose of the present studies was to create a scale that measures attitudes toward individuals with CFS–the Chronic Fatigue Attitudes Test (CAT)–and to assess the scale’s reliability and validity. The 13-item scale was created using several constructs outlined in the literature regarding negative attitudes toward people with CFS, disabilities, and AIDS. Theoretical implications of the findings and the utility of the CAT are discussed.

 

Source: Shlaes JL, Jason LA, Ferrari JR. The development of the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Attitudes Test. A psychometric analysis. Eval Health Prof. 1999 Dec;22(4):442-65. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10623400

 

Monitoring and assessing symptoms of chronic fatigue syndrome: use of time series regression

Abstract:

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome’s principal symptoms are severe and include prolonged fatigue and a number of other minor symptoms. Behavioral data collection methods were used in a case study to show some of the benefits that can be derived from monitoring symptoms hourly and daily. Using time series regression, several statistically significant correlates of fatigue were found both within days and between days. Perceived energy, physical exertion, and mental exertion were significantly related to fatigue in both analyses. Collection of such data may help resolve a number of theoretical and methodological problems in research on the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

 

Source: Jason LA, Tryon WW, Taylor RR, King C, Frankenberry EL, Jordan KM. Monitoring and assessing symptoms of chronic fatigue syndrome: use of time series regression. Psychol Rep. 1999 Aug;85(1):121-30. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10575979

 

Reviewing the reviews: the example of chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that the selection of literature in review articles is unsystematic and is influenced by the authors’ discipline and country of residence.

DATA SOURCES: Reviews in English published between 1980 and March 1996 in MEDLINE, EMBASE (BIDS), PSYCHLIT, and Current Contents were searched.

STUDY SELECTION: Reviews of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) were selected. Articles explicitly concerned with a specialty aspect of CFS and unattributed, unreferenced, or insufficiently referenced articles were discarded.

DATA EXTRACTION: Record of data sources in each review was noted as was the departmental specialty of the first author and his or her country of residence. The references cited in each index paper were tabulated by assigning them to 6 specialty categories, by article title, and by assigning them to 8 categories, by country of journal publication.

DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 89 reviews, 3 (3.4%) reported on literature search and described search method. Authors from laboratory-based disciplines preferentially cited laboratory references, while psychiatry-based disciplines preferentially cited psychiatric literature (P = .01). A total of 71.6% of references cited by US authors were from US journals, while 54.9% of references cited by United Kingdom authors were published in United Kingdom journals (P = .001).

CONCLUSION: Citation of the literature is influenced by review authors’ discipline and nationality.

 

Source: Joyce J, Rabe-Hesketh S, Wessely S. Reviewing the reviews: the example of chronic fatigue syndrome. JAMA. 1998 Jul 15;280(3):264-6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9676676