Category: Overview

ME: is it a genuine disease?

Abstract:

Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) is a postviral syndrome whose dominant clinical features are exercise-induced muscle fatigue, disturbances in cognitive functioning and symptoms of overactivity of the autonomic nervous system. The syndrome tends to affect previously fit young adults between the ages of 20 and 40 but no age group is excluded. One recent epidemiological survey suggested a prevalence rate of 1.3 per 1000 adults, with females outnumbering males by 1.8:1. ME is currently the subject of intense medical (and media) debate, especially over its pathophysiology and management. It has also become known as the postviral/chronic fatigue syndrome (PVFS/CFS).

Comment in: It could be ME. [Health Visit. 1992]

 

Source: Shepherd C, Lees H. ME: is it a genuine disease? Health Visit. 1992 May;65(5):165-7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1624312

 

Chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome appears to represent a spectrum of disorders in which a variety of pathophysiological mechanisms may operate. While the initiating event in the majority of patients is a pyrexial illness, possibly due to enterovirus infection, evidence of persisting infection or inflammatory changes in muscle and/or brain remain unconvincing.

CFS patients display a definite reduced aerobic work capacity compared to normal control subjects, but this may reflect a state of deconditioning resulting from prolonged physical inactivity. They also have an altered perception of their level of exertion and premorbid fitness.

The characteristic fluctuation in symptoms, with periods of relapses and partial remissions, may indicate that some central disorder of sensory perception is operational. It may be that a primary sleep disorder results in a reduced sensory threshold for afferent stimuli from muscle. This could well account for many of the subjective symptoms which patients experience. Much more research is clearly necessary if we are to achieve a better understanding of this distressing and at present enigmatic disorder.

 

Source: McCluskey DR, Riley MS. Chronic fatigue syndrome. Compr Ther. 1992 Apr;18(4):13-6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1628478

 

The epidemiology of fatigue: more questions than answers

Fatigue syndromes, though recognised for some time, have recently attracted a variety of new diagnostic labels, as well as both professional and media controversy. However, most of the arguments surround the interpretation of small hospital based case-control studies using highly selected groups of patients.’ There is relative silence on population based studies, which perhaps contributes to the lack of concensus. This paper reviews the epidemiology of fatigue in the general population and in primary care and examines potential sources of bias in hospital based studies

You can read the rest of this article here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1059513/pdf/jepicomh00209-0006.pdf

 

Source: Lewis G, Wessely S. The epidemiology of fatigue: more questions than answers. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1992 Apr;46(2):92-7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1059513/

 

The measurement of fatigue and chronic fatigue syndrome

Comment in: Chronic fatigue syndrome and heterogeneity. [J R Soc Med. 1992]

 

Fatigue remains as elusive a human experience as ever. At the turn of the century fatigue was almost an obsession of doctors, scientists, writers and even politicians. The scientists believed they could measure it, the doctors they could treat it, the writers describe it, and the politicians prevent it (1). Many confidently expected that fatigue could be eliminated from schools, factories, armies, and even society. That it had to be dealt with was not in doubt, since many authorities believed that if not checked, fatigue, the inevitable consequence of modern life in all its forms, would somehow destroy the nation’s health and its future. Perhaps only the writers achieved their objective (2) – certainly, the descriptions of fatigue and exhaustion in the turn of the century literature, and even in the medical journals, are far richer and detailed than the leaden descriptions which we now encounter.

You can read the rest of this article here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1294719/pdf/jrsocmed00112-0007.pdf

 

Source: Wessely S. The measurement of fatigue and chronic fatigue syndrome. J R Soc Med. 1992 Apr;85(4):189-90. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1294719/

 

Chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

Fatigue is one of the most common complaints among patients seen in the primary care setting. Chronic fatigue syndrome, which has recently been called chronic fatigue immune dysfunction syndrome, is distinctive, with an abrupt onset of symptoms that wax and wane for at least six months.

Usually there is low-grade fever, pharyngitis and tender, but not enlarged, lymph nodes. The fatigue can be disabling and is often made worse by physical activity. Some patients with this disorder have also been found to have highly characteristic immunologic abnormalities.

Treatment can be rewarding and is based on patient education and support, exercise and symptomatic therapies for abnormal sleep patterns, musculoskeletal pain and other symptoms.

 

Source: Calabrese L, Danao T, Camara E, Wilke W. Chronic fatigue syndrome. Am Fam Physician. 1992 Mar;45(3):1205-13. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1543105

 

Conversation piece

Dr E.G. Dowsett is Honorary Consultant Microbiologist, Basildon and Thurrock Health Authority and is the President of the Myalgic Encephalomyelitis Society.

 

DR P.D. WELSBY: I, and indeed many general physicians, are often asked to see patients whose main complaint is ‘tiredness all the time (TATT)’. From my previous experience also of general practice it seems that there is a wide continuous spectrum of debility ranging from a few days or weeks, but sometimes, distressingly, lasting for years. Such illnesses may or may not follow symptoms of an infection. Does the Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) Society differentiate between post-viral debility, postinfectious (often an undefined infection) fatigue syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome and ME? If so, how, and should it make any difference to medical management?

DR E.G. DOWSETT: One of the most striking features of ME is that the patient is not tired all the time! Extreme and sudden variability of energy levels both within and between episodes of illness differentiate this syndrome from other diseases associated with fatigue. One can only deplore the current fashion in the United States as well as the United Kingdom to redefine and rename a disability which has been clearly described in the literature for at least 100 years.’ There is nothing to be said in favour of the American acronym CFIDS (chronic fatigue immune deficiency syndrome) with its connotation of a primary immune dysfunction. The term ‘chronic fatigue syndrome’ recently adopted in this country also is nonspecific and non-descriptive because most of the definition is based on a vast number of exclusions (some of which, for example, endocrine disturbance, are actually found in ME). ‘Post-viral fatigue syndrome’, another British name, describes one essential feature (the association of the illness with viral infection) but gives the impression that the infection was antecedent rather than, as we now know, persistent. I prefer to use the more specific term ‘myalgic encephalomyelitis’ as it emphasizes the essential encephalitic component of the illness, the muscle pain, and the close clinical and epidemiological similarity to poliomyelitis.

You can read the rest of this interview here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2399326/pdf/postmedj00061-0066.pdf

 

Source: E. G. Dowsett. Conversation piece. Interview by P. D. Welsby.Postgrad Med J. 1992 Jan; 68(795): 63–65. PMCID: PMC2399326 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2399326/

 

Tired all the time

General practitioners often see a syndrome they call “tired all the time.” How often doctors see it depends on how tiredness is defined and where it is measured. Morrell recorded fatigue as the most important reason for consultation in 24 per 2000 registered patients in one year 1; Jerrett recorded fatigue as a presenting or supporting symptom in 150 per 2000 registered patients.2 Yet patients may not necessarily mention fatigue when they consult. A survey of patients waiting in one surgery found that a tenth reported “substantial fatigue” for a month or more 3; 18-34% of respondents in a community survey reported always feeling tired in the past month 4; and when young women patients were asked to record symptoms in diaries 400 episodes of fatigue were recorded for every one reported to the doctor.5 Clinicians may regard this iceberg as a puzzle, and a blessing. But how should they manage the cases that do present?

Little has been published on tiredness in primary care, with only one prospective study from Britain2 and two retrospective ones from American family practice.67 The results suggest that psychosocial causes are paramount in 40-51% of cases and physical causes in 21-39%.267 The remaining cases are of mixed or undetermined cause. Fatigue presents three times more often in women of childbearing age,2 who often have a working day that is long and difficult to organise, with no boundary between home and work.8 The wise doctor steers between the extremes of trivialising and medicalising such “social” fatigue. If the cause is existential rather than medical counselling may help the patient consider various alternatives and make new choices.

You can read the rest of this article here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1671843/pdf/bmj00157-0008.pdf

 

Source: Ridsdale L. Tired all the time. BMJ. 1991 Dec 14;303(6816):1490-1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1671843/

 

An overview of chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Psychological and immunologic factors both appear to contribute to chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). By comparing CFS with other disorders in which fatigue is a prominent symptom, the association between fatigue, psychological vulnerability, depression, and immune function may be further defined. Recent data from psychological, neurologic, and immunologic studies that address these issues are reviewed.

METHOD: Articles and abstracts covering CFS and related topics of fatigue, depression, and postinfectious syndromes were identified through MEDLINE and Index Medicus (1980-1990) and by bibliographic review of pertinent review articles.

RESULTS: The 1988 definition of CFS by the Centers for Disease Control encompasses several conditions in which the major characteristic is severe fatigue associated with constitutional symptoms. Several studies have identified immune dysfunction in CFS patients, but the specificity of these findings remains unclear. Most studies have shown that CFS patients, compared with other patients with chronic medical illness, experience more disabling fatigue. Some investigators have found a higher incidence of concurrent and past psychiatric illness in CFS patients compared with other medical patients, thereby suggesting an underlying psychopathology in CFS. However, other studies have not found a higher than expected incidence of past depression in CFS patients and have further shown that many CFS patients have no identifiable psychopathology.

CONCLUSION: CFS appears to be a heterogenous entity. Although there may be a high coincidence of major depression in CFS, a substantial proportion of patients lack any identifiable DSM-III-R psychiatric disorder yet still manifest the syndrome, thereby suggesting it has an autonomous entity. Despite the evolving nature of our current understanding of CFS, a rational diagnostic and therapeutic approach to CFS is possible.

 

Comment in: Pathogenesis of chronic fatigue syndrome. [J Clin Psychiatry. 1992]

 

Source: Krupp LB, Mendelson WB, Friedman R. An overview of chronic fatigue syndrome. J Clin Psychiatry. 1991 Oct;52(10):403-10. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1938975

 

Post-viral fatigue syndrome. Epidemiology: lessons from the past

Abstract:

This chapter outlines the recorded epidemiological history of PVFS (including the early epidemics of myalgic encephalomyelitis) and the development of the concept, including the realisation that endemic cases also occur.

Cases of PVFS are still not recorded by the Surveillance Centre for Communicable Diseases, so it is very difficult to detect and monitor any outbreak in the community, since each GP may only have two or three such patients and would, therefore, not be aware of an epidemic in the community as a whole if it occurred.

Epidemiological issues raised by the early epidemics, including the delineation of the syndrome, the question of bias, the role of hysteria and the role of depression; the issue of symptom distribution, and its implications for aetiology; and a multiaxial framework for understanding the association with psychological symptoms are discussed. The value of a future multidisciplinary research programme designed to disentangle direct and predisposing causes of PVFS is emphasised.

 

Source: Jenkins R. Post-viral fatigue syndrome. Epidemiology: lessons from the past. Br Med Bull. 1991 Oct;47(4):952-65. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1794093

 

Psychiatric perspectives: an overview

Abstract:

This chapter reviews the evidence concerning the importance of psychological and social factors in the aetiology and pathogenesis of chronic fatigue syndrome. The diagnosis is often offered to doctors by patients; and we consider attribution, stigma, collusion between doctor and patient, and abnormal illness behaviour in this context. We then give a brief description of a model for common mental disorders, and show how chronic fatigue syndrome relates to this model. It emerges that there are special vulnerability factors in these patients’ personalities before the viral illness, but the disorder is seen as being released by the viral illness. By the time the disorder becomes established the original causal nexus is seen as no longer so important, and the disorder can be seen as a form of abnormal illness behaviour maintained by special factors. The implications for treatment are then considered.

 

Source: Woods TO, Goldberg DP. Psychiatric perspectives: an overview. r Med Bull. 1991 Oct;47(4):908-18. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1794090