The Rise and Fall of the Psychosomatic Approach to Medically Unexplained Symptoms, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Abstract:

The psychosomatic approach to medically unexplained symptoms, myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome (MUS/ME/CFS) is critically reviewed using scientific criteria. Based on the ‘Biopsychosocial Model’, the psychosomatic theory proposes that patients’ dysfunctional beliefs, deconditioning and attentional biases cause or make illness worse, disrupt therapies, and lead to preventable deaths. The evidence reviewed suggests that none of these psychosomatic hypotheses is empirically supported.

The lack of robust supportive evidence together with the use of fallacious causal assumptions, inappropriate and harmful therapies, broken scientific principles, repeated methodological flaws and an unwillingness to share data all give the appearance of cargo cult science. The psychosomatic approach needs to be replaced by a scientific, biologically grounded approach to MUS/ME/CFS that can be expected to provide patients with appropriate care and treatments. Patients with MUS/ME/CFS and their families have not been treated with the dignity, respect and care that is their human right. Patients with MUS/ME/CFS and their families could consider a class action legal case against the injuring parties.

Source: David F Marks. (2022). The Rise and Fall of the Psychosomatic Approach to Medically Unexplained Symptoms,
Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. Arch Epidemiol Pub Health Res, 1(2), 97-143. https://www.opastpublishers.com/peer-review/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-psychosomatic-approach-to-medically-unexplained-symptoms-myalgic-encephalomyelitis-and-chronic–4899.html (Full text available as PDF file)

Psychological consequences of long COVID: comparing trajectories of depressive and anxiety symptoms before and after contracting SARS-CoV-2 between matched long- and short-COVID groups

Abstract:

Background: There is a growing global awareness of the psychological consequences of long COVID, supported by emerging empirical evidence. However, the emergence and long-term trajectories of psychological symptoms following the infection are still unclear.

Aims: To examine when psychological symptoms first emerge following infection with SARS-CoV-2 and the long-term trajectories of psychological symptoms comparing long- and short-COVID groups.

Method: We analysed longitudinal data from the UCL COVID-19 Social Study (March 2020 to November 2021). We included data from adults living in England who reported contracting SARS-CoV-2 by November 2021 (n = 3115). Of these, 15.9% reported having had long COVID (n = 495). They were matched to participants who had short COVID using propensity score matching on a variety of demographic, socioeconomic and health covariates (n = 962 individuals with 13 325 observations) and data were further analysed using growth curve modelling.

Results: Depressive and anxiety symptoms increased immediately following the onset of infection in both long- and short-COVID groups. But the long-COVID group had substantially greater initial increases in depressive symptoms and heightened levels over 22 months follow-up. Initial increases in anxiety were not significantly different between groups, but only the short-COVID group experienced an improvement in anxiety over follow-up, leading to widening differences between groups.

Conclusions: The findings support work on the psychobiological pathways involved in the development of psychological symptoms relating to long COVID. The results highlight the need for monitoring of mental health and provision of adequate support to be interwoven with diagnosis and treatment of the physical consequences of long COVID.

Source: Fancourt D, Steptoe A, Bu F. Psychological consequences of long COVID: comparing trajectories of depressive and anxiety symptoms before and after contracting SARS-CoV-2 between matched long- and short-COVID groups. Br J Psychiatry. 2022 Dec 2:1-8. doi: 10.1192/bjp.2022.155. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 36458509. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-british-journal-of-psychiatry/article/psychological-consequences-of-long-covid-comparing-trajectories-of-depressive-and-anxiety-symptoms-before-and-after-contracting-sarscov2-between-matched-long-and-shortcovid-groups/923140B3F95F1158C0CDC188002531AE (Full text)

Psychogenic Explanations of Physical Illness: Time to Examine the Evidence

Abstract:

In some patients with chronic physical complaints, detailed examination fails to reveal a well-recognized underlying disease process. In this situation, the physician may suspect a psychological cause. In this review, we critically evaluated the evidence for this causal claim, focusing on complaints presenting as neurological disorders.

There were four main conclusions. First, patients with these complaints frequently exhibit psychopathology but not consistently more often than patients with a comparable “organic” diagnosis, so a causal role cannot be inferred.

Second, these patients report a high incidence of adverse life experiences, but again, there is insufficient evidence to indicate a causal role for any particular type of experience.

Third, although psychogenic illnesses are believed to be more responsive to psychological interventions than comparable “organic” illnesses, there is currently no evidence to support this claim.

Finally, recent evidence suggests that biological and physical factors play a much greater causal role in these illnesses than previously believed. We conclude that there is currently little evidential support for psychogenic theories of illness in the neurological domain. In future research, researchers need to take a wider view concerning the etiology of these illnesses.

Source: Carolyn E. Wilshire and Tony Ward. Psychogenic Explanations of Physical Illness: Time to Examine the Evidence. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2016, Vol. 11(5) 606–631. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283476227_Psychogenic_explanations_of_physical_illness_Time_to_examine_the_evidence (Full text)

Experiences of carers of youth, adult children and spouses with ME/CFS

Abstract:

Objectives: The debilitating nature of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) means that family members often take on a caring role. This study compared the experiences of people caring for three groups: youth, young adults, spouses.

Methods: An opportunistic sample of 36 carers completed an online survey of open-ended questions asking about their experiences. Thematic analysis was used to consider the three sets of responses separately and Thematic Comparison was used to identify points of connection and disconnection across the sets.

Results: The themes identified were very similar to those identified in past studies. Two super-ordinate themes were identified: “Lack of knowledge and understanding” and “Holistic Impact”. Though most sub-ordinate themes were evident across all three groups, important differences were found. The sub-ordinate themes “Caring Blindly”, “Emotional and physical health cost”, and “Impact on the whole family” were more evident amongst carers of youth while the theme “Worry for the future” was more evident from carers of young adults and spouses.

Discussion: Differences seemed to be related to both the time since diagnosis and the life stage. A longitudinal study would help to understand how carer experiences change over the life course of caring for someone with ME/CFS.

Source: Baken DM, Ross KJ, Hodges LD, Batten L. Experiences of carers of youth, adult children and spouses with ME/CFS. Chronic Illn. 2022 Oct 18:17423953221121696. doi: 10.1177/17423953221121696. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 36259126. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36259126/

Grief in Chronic Illness: A Case Study of CFS/ME

Abstract:

This paper points to a more expansive conception of grief by arguing that the losses of illness can be genuine objects of grief.

I argue for this by illuminating underappreciated structural features of typical grief — that is, grief over a bereavement — which are shared but under-recognized. I offer a common chronic illness, chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME), as a striking case study.

I then use this analysis to highlight some clinical challenges that arise should this claim receive uptake in clinical practice.

Extant literature on CFS/ME tells us that rates of comorbid depression are atypically high. If one accepts that people with CFS/ ME can grieve over losses associated with the condition, and that grief can be easily mistaken for depression in this context, this might suggest that rates of comorbid depression are inflated.

I show, however, that the challenge of distinguishing between healthy and pathological grief arises in its place, and is just as tricky to solve.

Source: Byrne, Eleanor Alexandra. Grief in Chronic Illness: A Case Study of CFS/ME. Journal of Consciousness Studies, Volume 29, Numbers 9-10, September 2022, pp. 175-200(26). https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/imp/jcs/2022/00000029/f0020009/art00009

Towards a critical psychology of chronic fatigue syndrome: Biopsychosocial narratives and UK welfare reform

Abstract:

Chronic fatigue syndrome, understood as per (bio) psychosocial discourse, is a political construction, serving actors and structures associated with welfare reform, to the detriment of patients.

The condition typically known as myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a chronic, disabling condition characterised by post-exertional malaise, often accompanied by cognitive impairment, pain, sleep disturbance, gastro-intestinal and autonomic dysfunction (Goudsmit et al., 2009). ME/CFS is positioned as having multifactorial aetiology, including a genetic predisposition, precipitated by viral, bacterial and parasitic infection, toxins and stress, perpetuated through neuro-immune and metabolic dysfunction (Cortes Rivera et al., 2019). The dominant conceptualisation of ME/CFS in UK healthcare, generated through a biopsychosocial model with a cognitivebehavioural focus, is that of a psychosocial entity which, whilst possibly precipitated by a virus or other stressor, is perpetuated by ‘maladaptive’ illness beliefs, fear-avoidance behaviours, and social reinforcement (Sharpe et al., 1997; Deary et al., 2007; Harvey & Wessely, 2009). This conceptualisation has been critiqued for lacking empirical support.

Read the rest of this article HERE.

Source: Hunt, Joanne. Towards a critical psychology of chronic fatigue syndrome: Biopsychosocial narratives and UK welfare reform. Journal of Critical Psychology, Counselling and Psychotherapy, Vol. 22, No. 1, 18-28  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361017759_Towards_a_critical_psychology_of_chronic_fatigue_syndrome_Biopsychosocial_narratives_and_UK_welfare_reform (Full text)

Comorbidity of long COVID and psychiatric disorders after a hospitalisation for COVID-19: a cross-sectional study

Abstract:

Objectives: Long COVID is a major public health issue. Whether long COVID is comorbid with psychiatric disorders remains unclear. Here, we investigate the association between long COVID, psychiatric symptoms and psychiatric disorders.

Design: Cross-sectional.

Settings: Bicêtre Hospital, France, secondary care.

Participants: One hundred seventy-seven patients admitted in intensive care unit during acute phase and/or reporting long COVID complaints were assessed 4 months after hospitalisation for an acute COVID.

Main outcome measures: Eight long COVID complaints were investigated: fatigue, respiratory and cognitive complaints, muscle weakness, pain, headache, paraesthesia and anosmia. The number of complaints, the presence/absence of each COVID-19 complaint as well as lung CT scan abnormalities and objective cognitive impairment) were considered. Self-reported psychiatric symptoms were assessed with questionnaires. Experienced psychiatrists assessed Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition-based diagnoses of psychiatric disorders.

Results: One hundred and fifteen (65%) patients had at least one long COVID complaint. The number of long COVID complaints was associated with psychiatric symptoms. The number of long COVID complaints was higher in patients with psychiatric disorders (mean (m) (SD)=2.47 (1.30), p<0.05), new-onset psychiatric disorders (m (SD)=2.41 (1.32), p<0.05) and significant suicide risk (m (SD)=2.67 (1.32), p<0.05) than in patients without any psychiatric disorder (m (SD)=1.43 (1.48)). Respiratory complaints were associated with a higher risk of psychiatric disorder and new-onset psychiatric disorder, and cognitive complaints were associated with a higher risk of psychiatric disorder.

Conclusions: Long COVID is associated with psychiatric disorders, new-onset psychiatric disorders and suicide risk. Psychiatric disorders and suicide risk should be systematically assessed in patients with long COVID.

Source: Gasnier M, Choucha W, Radiguer F, Faulet T, Chappell K, Bougarel A, Kondarjian C, Thorey P, Baldacci A, Ballerini M, Ait Tayeb AEK, Herrero H, Hardy-Leger I, Meyrignac O, Morin L, Lecoq AL, Pham T, Noel N, Jollant F, Montani D, Monnet X, Becquemont L, Corruble E, Colle R; COMEBAC study group. Comorbidity of long COVID and psychiatric disorders after a hospitalisation for COVID-19: a cross-sectional study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2022 Aug 11:jnnp-2021-328516. doi: 10.1136/jnnp-2021-328516. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35953265.  https://jnnp.bmj.com/content/early/2022/08/10/jnnp-2021-328516 (Full text)

Holistic or harmful? Examining socio-structural factors in the biopsychosocial model of chronic illness, ‘medically unexplained symptoms’ and disability

A particular application of the biopsychosocial model is associated in peer-reviewed literature and patient testimony with harms done to chronically ill and disabled people. These harms derive from an empirically unsubstantiated, neoliberal narrative emphasising the role of personal responsibility and effort in ‘recovery’ from ill-health, ignoring socio-structural contributors to chronic illness and disability. Notably, this biopsychosocial model ignores the health-related impact of welfare and disability insurance reforms which the model has been employed to justify. The model and associated interests can thus be recognised as socio-structural phenomena that should be acknowledged in any truly holistic biopsychosocial approach to chronic illness and disability. A critically informed and reflexive approach to biopsychosocial theorising would allow a more holistic and nuanced understanding of chronic illness and disability, with implications for health and social policy that underline and address what ails society as opposed to what is ‘wrong’ with the individual.

  • Points of interest
  • The biopsychosocial approach suggests that health and illness should be understood ‘holistically’. This means considering not only a person’s biology, but also their psychology (thoughts and behaviour) and social context (for example, social support levels).

  • A particular variant of biopsychosocial model, dominant in UK health and social policy, has been associated with political agendas, predominantly: welfare reform, healthcare spending cuts, and creation of profits for the disability insurance industry.

  • This variant of the model has also been associated with harms experienced by chronically ill and disabled people.

  • Any truly holistic biopsychosocial framework should acknowledge the broader social (here, political) context that has shaped this model and recognise how the model, and associated practices, may contribute to chronic illness and disability.

  • Such a framework gives rise to recommendations for health and social policy and practice that address what is wrong with society as opposed to what is ‘wrong’ with the person.

Source: Joanne Hunt (2022) Holistic or harmful? Examining socio-structural factors in the biopsychosocial model of chronic illness, ‘medically unexplained symptoms’ and disability, Disability & Society, DOI: 10.1080/09687599.2022.2099250 (Full text)

Evidence-Based Care for People with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis

Letter to the Editor:

Sharpe et al. suggest that “the available evidence from randomized trials supports the use of the rehabilitative therapies of CBT and GET for patients with CFS/ME”.1 However, the current NICE guideline on the diagnosis and management of ME/CFS (which replaced the out-of-date guideline CG53 cited by Sharpe et al.) recommends that CBT and GET should not be prescribed as treatments for ME/CFS, due to the lack of evidence of efficacy and concerns about safety.2 As part of the process of updating its guidance, NICE reviewed all the relevant evidence from trials of these therapies. It concluded that none was better than low quality and that most was very low quality.3

It is notable that such therapies were first promoted and prescribed for ME/CFS before any clinical trials had been conducted to assess their efficacy or safety. In 1989, Wessely et al. acknowledged that it “may be correct in some cases” that physical and mental exertion should be avoided by people with ME/CFS, but they went on to recommend behavioural and cognitive therapies which encouraged patients to ignore their symptoms and gradually increase exercise, as there was “as yet no way” to identify the cases where such approaches may be harmful. Furthermore, the authors suggested that “it is reasonable to expect a patient to cooperate with treatment before being labelled as chronically disabled” for the purposes of receiving sickness benefits.4

Sharpe et al. acknowledge that since then CBT and GET have been “the most researched approaches” to treating what they refer to as CFS/ME. However, despite this, they conclude that “more research is needed into these approaches” and that “it would be a disservice to our patients to tell them we have nothing to offer them”.

It is deeply regrettable that, as NICE has concluded, there are currently no proven effective treatments for ME/CFS. However, it would be a far greater disservice to patients to prescribe ineffective and potentially harmful therapies than to tell them the truth. Given the history of how these therapies have been promoted, prescribed and researched, it is perhaps not surprising if some are reluctant to accept the evidence that they do not work and may be harmful. However, as Wilshire et al. concluded in their 2018 reanalysis of the PACE trial data: “The time has come to look elsewhere for effective treatments.”5

Read this article HERE.

Source: Saunders R. Evidence-Based Care for People with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis. J Gen Intern Med. 2022 Jul 5. doi: 10.1007/s11606-022-07715-x. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35790668. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-022-07715-x (Full text)

Pale rider: the Spanish flu of 1918 and how it changed the world

Book Review:

Pale rider: The Spanish Flu of 1918 and How it Changed the World by Laura Spinney, Public Affairs; 1st edition (September 12, 2017)

Formerly Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed life for humanity, nothing is “normal” anymore! In the last 100 years, there has not been any similar event. The common feeling among professionals, planners, press, politicians, and people is that “life will not be the same as we knew it, after the pandemic.” Understanding the likely impact of the pandemic and its consequences would be valuable to humanity in general and mental health professionals in particular. Against this current world-shaking event, it is natural to look for similar events in human history. In this, the 1918 flu is the closest event to understand a variety of aspects of the current pandemic. The book, Pale Rider: The Spanish Flu of 1918 and how it changed the world, is one of the best books in this field.[1] That many people are looking at the 1918 flu can be seen by the number of articles in the lay press that have focused on the 1918 flu.[2],[3],[4],[5],[6],[7] Even now, a new book was published as latest as July 23, 2020.[8],[9]

Nevertheless, the book, under review, has 21 chapters with attractive chapter titles such as Like a Thief in the Night; The Doctor’s Dilemma; The Wrath of God; Chalking Doors with Crosses; Good Samaritans; The Human Factor; The Green Shoots of Recovery; Alternate Histories; and Health Care for all and Melancholy Muse.

Between the first case recorded on March 4, 1918, and the last case sometime in March 1920, it killed 50–100 million people, or between 2.5% and 5% of the global population. In terms of a single event causing major loss of life, it surpassed the First World War (17 million dead) and the Second World War (60 million dead). India was specially affected and lost around 6% of its population, the greatest loss in absolute numbers of any country in the world (an estimate of 13–18 million). The book has a special focus on India,[1] presented through the lives of Mahatma Gandhi, Tagore, Munshi Premchand, and Nirala and its impact on the Independence struggle.

Mahatma Gandhi was affected by the gastric variety of flu. At Gandhi’s ashram, several prominent members of the Independence Movement were laid low with flu. Gandhi was too feverish to speak or read; he couldn’t shake a sense of doom: “All interest in living had ceased.” Interestingly, Gandhi’s reaction was: This protracted and first long illness in my life thus afforded me a unique opportunity to examine my principles and to test them. Rabindranath Tagore returned his knighthood as a reaction to the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, and observed that British were guilty of “the same kind of ignorance of the eternal laws which primitive people show when they hunt for some so-called witch to whom they ascribe the cause of their illness, while carrying the disease germs in their own blood.” Spinney observes that disease was a major preoccupation in the writing that emerged in the 1920s, where it dovetailed with ideas about the need to reform the caste system and throw off the yoke of British rule. Munshi Premchand became the self-styled “chronicler of village life” around 1918 when he was living in the United Provinces (Uttar Pradesh), where the Spanish flu claimed an estimated 2–3 million lives alone. Also living there at that time was the poet Nirala, who lost his wife and many other members of his family to the flu. He later recalled seeing the River Ganges “swollen with dead bodies.” This was the strangest time in my life. My family disappeared in the blink of an eye.

There are sections in the book describing the feelings of anxiety accompanying the acute phase of the disease, and reports of people killing themselves while delirious. Following recovery, some patients found themselves plunged into a lingering state of lassitude and despair. Norwegian epidemiologist Svenn-Erik Mamelund studied asylum records in his country from 1872 to 1929 and found that, every year, in which there was no pandemic of influenza, only a few cases were admitted of mental illness associated with flu. However, in each of the 6 years following the 1918 pandemic, the average number of such admissions was seven times higher than in those nonpandemic years (emphasis added). Mamelund speculates that the patients admitted in those 6 years were survivors of Spanish flu who were suffering from what today we would call “postviral or chronic fatigue syndrome.”

The book provides similar creative responses in a number of countries following the pandemic. The paragraph about controversies about the quarantine makes for contemporary reading: “Quarantine and other disease containment strategies place the interests of the collective over those of the individual. When the collective is very large, those strategies have to be imposed in a top-down fashion. But mandating a central authority to act in the interests of the collective potentially creates two kinds of problems. First, the collective may have competing priorities-the need to make money, or the need to raise an army-and deny or water-down the authority’s powers of enforcement. Second, the rights of individuals risk getting trampled on, especially if the authority abuses the measures placed at its disposal.”

One of the quotes from the book can portend what we can expect in the coming years in the country. Spinney notes, “The 1918 pandemic accelerated the pace of change in the first half of the twentieth century, and helped shape our modern world. It influenced the course of the First World War and arguably, contributed to the Second. It pushed India closer to Independence, South Africa closer to Apartheid, and Switzerland to the brink of Civil War. It ushered in universal healthcare and alternative medicine, our love of fresh air and our passion for sport, and it was probably responsible, at least in part, for the obsession of twentieth-century artists with all the myriad ways in which the human body can fail.”

The book made me realize that the current pandemic will bring about extensive changes. Against this expected “mental health tsunami,” there are three tasks for each one of us: firstly, to document the experiences of individuals, families, communities, and the government; secondly, to identify the social factors contributing to vulnerabilities and resilience, to guide corrective actions; and lastly, to utilize the opportunity of heightened awareness of societal-level issues, to work toward addressing the predisposing causes for higher mortality and morbidity such as inequalities, intolerances, inadequate health infrastructure, the weak welfare network to support the vulnerable, and decentralization of powers and plans to enhance community participation.

I recommend it as an essential reading during the current pandemic period.

Source: Murthy R S. Pale rider: the spanish flu of 1918 and how it changed the world. Indian J Soc Psychiatry [serial online] 2020 [cited 2022 Jul 4];36, Suppl S1:189-90. Available from: https://www.indjsp.org/text.asp?2020/36/5/189/297158