Tag: CBT critique

The concept of ‘illness without disease’ impedes understanding of chronic fatigue syndrome: a response to Sharpe and Greco

Abstract:

In a recent article in Medical Humanities, Sharpe and Greco characterise myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) as an ‘illness without disease’, citing the absence of identified diagnostic markers. They attribute patients’ rejection of psychological and behavioural interventions, such as cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy (GET), to a ‘paradox’ resulting from a supposed failure to acknowledge that ‘there is no good objective evidence of bodily disease’. In response, we explain that understandings about the causes of and treatments for medical complaints have shifted across centuries, and that conditions once thought to be ‘psychosomatic’ have later been determined to have physiological causes.

We also note that Sharpe and Greco do not disclose that leading scientists and physicians believe that ME/CFS is a biomedical disease, and that numerous experts, not just patients, have rejected the research underlying the CBT/GET treatment approach. In conclusion, we remind investigators that medical classifications are always subject to revision based on subsequent research, and we therefore call for more humility before declaring categorically that patients are experiencing ‘illness without disease’.

Source: Lubet S, Tuller D. The concept of ‘illness without disease’ impedes understanding of chronic fatigue syndrome: a response to Sharpe and Greco [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jun 1]. Med Humanit. 2020;medhum-2019-011807. doi:10.1136/medhum-2019-011807 https://mh.bmj.com/content/early/2020/06/01/medhum-2019-011807

Treating medically unexplained symptoms via improving access to psychological therapy (IAPT): major limitations identified

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Improving Access to Psychological Therapies is a UK Government funded initiative to widen access to psychological treatment for a range of common mental health complaints, such as depression and anxiety. More recently, the service has begun to treat patients with medically unexplained symptoms. This paper reports on a review of treatment protocols and early treatment data for medically unexplained symptoms, specifically the illness myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome.

MAIN TEXT: A series of seven core problems and failings are identified, including an unproven treatment rationale, a weak and contested evidence-base, biases in treatment promotion, exaggeration of recovery claims, under-reporting of drop-out rates, and a significant risk of misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment.

CONCLUSIONS: There is a pressing need for independent oversight of this service, specifically evaluation of service performance and methods used to collect and report treatment outcomes. This service offers uniform psycho-behavioural therapy that may not meet the needs of many patients with medically unexplained health complaints. Psychotherapy should not become a default when patients’ physical symptoms remain unexplained, and patients should be fully informed of the rationale behind psychotherapy, before agreeing to take part. Patients who reject psychotherapy or do not meet selection criteria should be offered appropriate medical and psychological support.

Source: Geraghty K, Scott MJ. Treating medically unexplained symptoms via improving access to psychological therapy (IAPT): major limitations identified. BMC Psychol. 2020 Feb 5;8(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s40359-020-0380-2. https://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40359-020-0380-2 (Full article)

Cognitive behavioural therapy for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome is not effective. Re-analysis of a Cochrane review

Abstract:

Analysis of the 2008 Cochrane review of cognitive behavioural therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome shows that seven patients with mild chronic fatigue syndrome need to be treated for one to report a small, short-lived subjective improvement of fatigue. This is not matched by an objective improvement of physical fitness or employment and illness benefit status. Most studies in the Cochrane review failed to report on safety or adverse reactions. Patient evidence suggests adverse outcomes in 20 per cent of cases. If a trial of a drug or surgical procedure uncovered a similar high rate, it would be unlikely to be accepted as safe. It is time to downgrade cognitive behavioural therapy to an adjunct support-level therapy, rather than a treatment for chronic fatigue syndrome.

Source: Vink M, Vink-Niese A. Cognitive behavioural therapy for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome is not effective. Re-analysis of a Cochrane review. Health Psychol Open. 2019 May 2;6(1):2055102919840614. doi: 10.1177/2055102919840614. eCollection 2019 Jan-Jun. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6498783/  (Full article)

The ‘cognitive behavioural model’ of chronic fatigue syndrome: Critique of a flawed model

Abstract:

Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis is a debilitating illness that greatly impacts the lives of sufferers. A cognitive behavioural model attempts to explain illness onset and continuance with a hypothesis that the illness is perpetuated by patients’ irrational beliefs and avoidance behaviours. This theory underpins the promotion of cognitive behavioural therapy, a treatment that aims to change beliefs and behaviours. This article reports on a detailed review of the cognitive behavioural model. Our review finds that the model lacks high-quality evidential support, conflicts with accounts given by most patients and fails to account for accumulating biological evidence of pathological and physiological abnormalities found in patients. There is little scientific credibility in the claim that psycho-behavioural therapies are a primary treatment for this illness.

Source: Keith Geraghty, Leonard Jason, Madison Sunnquist, David Tuller, Charlotte Blease, Charles Adeniji. The ‘cognitive behavioural model’ of chronic fatigue syndrome: Critique of a flawed model. Health Psychology Open, Volume: 6 issue: 1,
Article first published online: April 23, 2019; Issue published: January 1, 2019. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2055102919838907 (Full article)

Rethinking the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome—a reanalysis and evaluation of findings from a recent major trial of graded exercise and CBT

Abstract:

Background: The PACE trial was a well-powered randomised trial designed to examine the efficacy of graded exercise therapy (GET) and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for chronic fatigue syndrome. Reports concluded that both treatments were moderately effective, each leading to recovery in over a fifth of patients. However, the reported analyses did not consistently follow the procedures set out in the published protocol, and it is unclear whether the conclusions are fully justified by the evidence.

Methods: Here, we present results based on the original protocol-specified procedures. Data from a recent Freedom of Information request enabled us to closely approximate these procedures. We also evaluate the conclusions from the trial as a whole.

Results: On the original protocol-specified primary outcome measure – overall improvement rates – there was a significant effect of treatment group. However, the groups receiving CBT or GET did not significantly outperform the Control group after correcting for the number of comparisons specified in the trial protocol. Also, rates of recovery were consistently low and not significantly different across treatment groups. Finally, on secondary measures, significant effects were almost entirely confined to self-report measures. These effects did not endure beyond two years.

Conclusions: These findings raise serious concerns about the robustness of the claims made about the efficacy of CBT and GET. The modest treatment effects obtained on self-report measures in the PACE trial do not exceed what could be reasonably accounted for by participant reporting biases.

Source: Carolyn E. Wilshire, Tom Kindlon, Robert Courtney, Alem Matthees, David Tuller, Keith Geraghty and Bruce Levin. Rethinking the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome—a reanalysis and evaluation of findings from a recent major trial of graded exercise and CBT. BMC PsychologyBMC series. Received: 29 May 2017; Accepted: 22 February 2018; Published: 22 March 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-018-0218-3 (Full article) © The Author(s) 2018.

A reexamination of the cognitive behavioral model of chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: The cognitive behavioral model of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) suggests that cognitions and reduced activity level perpetuate the fatigue and impairment that individuals with CFS experience. The two empirical evaluations of this model resulted in conflicting findings. The current study examines the influence of case definition fulfillment on the applicability of this model to CFS.

METHOD: A moderated mediation analysis was conducted on 990 individuals with CFS to reexamine the behavioral pathway of this model. Case definition fulfillment was entered as a moderator.

RESULTS: Findings were generally inconsistent with the cognitive behavioral model of CFS. Case definition fulfillment significantly moderated the relation between activity level and physical impairment (β = -0.08, p = 0.03); individuals who met more stringent case definitions demonstrated a weaker relation between activity level and impairment.

CONCLUSIONS: This model may not accurately represent the experience of individuals with CFS, particularly those who fulfill more stringent case definitions.

© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Source: Sunnquist M, Jason LA. A reexamination of the cognitive behavioral model of chronic fatigue syndrome. J Clin Psychol. 2018 Feb 19. doi: 10.1002/jclp.22593. [Epub ahead of print] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29457646

Studies and surveys implicate potential iatrogenic harm of cognitive behavioral therapy and graded exercise therapy for myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome patients

Abstract:

Cognitive behavorial therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy (GET) are declared to be effective and safe therapies for Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Medical policies in various countries, e.g. the UK and the Netherlands, recommend CBT and GET as evidence-based treatments. But studies and patient surveys in several countries indicate that CBT often has no effect at all and that GET has detrimental effects in a large subgroup of patients.

Editorial

ME is a disease characterized by distinctive muscular symptoms, including muscle weakness and myalgia after minor exertion lasting for days, neurological symptoms implicating cerebral dysfunction, symptoms indicating circulatory impairment and other symptoms [1,2]. CFS is primarily defined by (unexplained) chronic fatigue, which must be accompanied by at least four out of eight ‘additional’’ symptoms [3]. ME and CFS are incorrectly conceived as ‘similar disorders’ [4]. But the case criteria define three patient groups: ME and/or CFS patients [5], labeled as ME/CFS patients within this context.

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy (GET) are declared to be effective [6,7] and safe [7,8] therapies for Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Medical policies in various countries, e.g. the UK [9] and the Netherlands [10], recommend CBT and GET as evidence-based treatments.

However various studies implicate that CBT, GET and other behavioral interventions, including graded activity, have negative effects on (subgroups of) ME/CFS patients.

Núñez and co-workers [11] observed that adding CBT and GET to pharmacological treatment had a negative effect on SF-36 physical functioning and pain scores. Jason and others [12,13] found that ‘non-pharmacologic therapies’ had a negative effect on the mean SF- 36 physical functioning score (changes from 5 to -35) of a large subgroup of CFS patients, with lymphocyte subsets data suggesting an elevated humoral immune response (Th2/B Cell). Although ‘Guided graded Exercise Self-help’ (GET) was qualified as “a moderately effective and safe intervention” [14], the investigators acknowledged that a patient subgroup had deteriorated after the GET trial, possibly due to “a worse exacerbation of symptoms in response to GET” [15].

In various surveys [16-18] most ME/CFS patients experienced no improvement after CBT and more than half of the patients reported GET made them worse. A detailed analysis [18] of a large-scale patient survey in the UK [19] shows that, when combinations of therapies are excluded, 73% of the patients they stayed the same after CBT, while 8% of the patients improved and 18% got worse. No less than 74% of the patients reported worsening of their symptoms after GET, 14% of the patients experienced no change and only 12% reported improvement after GET. In a recent patient survey in the Netherlands [20] 11% reported CBT had improved their health situation, 36% experienced no change, and 53% reported CBT had worsened their condition. 63% reported GET had made their symptoms (much) worse and 34% reported no change. Only 3% of the patients experienced improvement after GET. One could argue that patient surveys (through the internet) are potentially prone to many biases, but a study [21] found that ‘’unsolicited’ web-based patient ratings of care correlate well with conventional research findings, i.e. formal measurements.

As affirmed by the medical authorities in the US recently, “ME/CFS is a serious, chronic, complex, multisystem disease” [4] with “strong evidence” indicating that “immunologic and inflammatory pathologic conditions, neurotransmitter signaling disruption, microbiome perturbation, and metabolic or mitochondrial abnormalities are potentially important for the definition and treatment of ME/CFS [22]. Exertion has (prolonged) negative effects in ME/CFS [4]. For that reason studies and surveys indicating potential harm of CBT and GET in large subgroups of ME/CFS patients should be taken seriously. The ‘safety claim’ is at odds with several observations.

References

  1. Dowsett EG, Ramsay AM, McCartney RA, et al. Myalgic Encephalomyelitis – a persistent enteroviral infection? Postgrad. Med. J.66(777), 526-530 (1990).

  2. Ramsay AM, Dowsett EG, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis: Then and now. In Hyde BM, Goldstein J, Levine P, editors. The Clinical and Scientific Basis of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. Ottawa: The Nightingale Research Foundation pp. 81-84 (1992).

  3. Fukuda K, Straus SE, Hickie I, et al. The chronic fatigue syndrome: a comprehen­sive approach to its definition and study. Ann. Intern. Med. 121(12), 953-959 (1994).

  4. Institute of Medicine. Beyond Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syn­drome: redefining an illness. Washington, (2015).

  5. Twisk FNM. Replacing Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome with Systemic Exercise Intolerance Disease is not the way forward. Diagnostics (Basel). 6(1), 10 (2016).

  6. Malouff JM, Thorsteinsson EB, Rooke SE, et al. Efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome: a meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 28(5), 736-745 (2008).

  7. Larun L, Brurberg KG, Odgaard-Jensen J, et al. Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 4, CD003200 (2017).

  8. Bleijenberg G, Knoop H. Chronic fatigue syndrome: where to PACE from here? Lancet. 377(9768), 786-788 (2011)

  9. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Chronic fatigue syndrome/ myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy): diagnosis and management of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy) in adults and children. London (UK), (2007).

  10. CBO. Richtlijn diagnose, behandeling, begeleiding en beoordeling van patiënten met het chronisch vermoeidheidssyndroom (CVS). Utrecht (NL), (2013).

  11. Núñez M, Fernández-Solà J, Nuñez E, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome: group cognitive behavioural therapy and graded exercise versus usual treatment. A randomised controlled trial with 1 year of follow-up. Clin. Rheumatol. 30(3), 381-389 (2011).

  12. Jason LA, Torres-Harding S, Friedberg F, et al. Non-pharmacologic interventions for CFS: a randomized trial. J. Clin. Psychol. Med. Settings. 14(4), 275-296 (2007).

  13. Jason LA, Torres-Harding S, Brown M, et al. Predictors of change following participation in non-pharmacologic interventions for CFS. Trop. Med. Health. 36(1), 23-32 (2008).

  14. Clark LV, McCrone P, Ridge D, et al. Graded Exercise Therapy guided Self-hElp Treatment (GETSET) for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome: a randomised controlled trial in secondary care. J. Psychosom. Res. 5(2), 59-60 (2016).

  15. Cheshire A, Ridge D, Clark L, et al. Why patients with chronic fatigue syndrome/ Myalgic Encephalomyelitis improve or deteriorate with graded exercise therapy. J. Psychosom. Res. 85, 59 (2016).

  16. Kirke KD. PACE investigators’ response is misleading regarding patient survey results. J. Health. Psych. 22(9), 1168-1176 (2017).

  17. Twisk FNM, Maes M. A review on cognitive behavorial therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy (GET) in myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) / chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS): CBT/GET is not only ineffective and not evidence-based, but also potentially harmful for many patients. Neuro. Endocrinol. Lett. 30(3), 284-299 (2009).

  18. Geraghty K, Hann M, Kurtev S. Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome patients’ reports of symptom changes following cognitive behavioural therapy, graded exercise therapy and pacing treatments: Analysis of a primary survey compared with secondary surveys. J. Health. Psychol. (2017).

  19. ME Association. “No decisions about me without me”. ME/CFS illness management survey results, part 1. Gawcott, Bucks (England), (2015).

  20. De Kimpe A, Crijnen B, Kuijper J, et al. Zorg voor ME – Enquête onder ME-patiënten naar hun ervaringen met de zorg in Nederland (2016).

  21. Greaves F, Pape UJ, King D, et al. Associations between Internet-based patient ratings and conventional surveys of patient experience in the English NHS: an observational study. BMJ. Qual. Saf. 21(7), 600-605 (2012).

  22. Green CR, Cowan P, Elk R, et al. National Institutes of Health pathways to prevention workshop: Advancing the research on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/ chronic fatigue syndrome. Ann. Intern. Med. 162(12), 860-865 (2015).

Source: Frank N.M. Twisk. Studies and surveys implicate potential iatrogenic harm of cognitive behavioral therapy and graded exercise therapy for myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome patients. Research on Chronic Diseases. http://www.openaccessjournals.com/articles/studies-and-surveys-implicate-potential-iatrogenic-harm-of-cognitive-behavioral-therapy-and-graded-exercise-therapy-for-myalgic-en-12190.html

Distress signals: Does cognitive behavioural therapy reduce or increase distress in chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis?

Abstract:

Reducing the psychological distress associated with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis is seen as a key aim of cognitive behavioural therapy. Although cognitive behavioural therapy is promoted precisely in this manner by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence, the evidence base on distress reduction from randomised controlled trials is limited, equivocal and poor quality. Crucially, data derived from multiple patient surveys point to worsening and increase distress; however, despite being invited, such data have been dismissed as second class by National Institute of Clinical Excellence. Crucially, the claim by National Institute of Clinical Excellence that cognitive behavioural therapy reduces distress in chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis is not only at odds with what patients repeatedly report in surveys, but with their own gold-standard randomised controlled trial and meta-analytic data.

Source: Laws KR. Distress signals: Does cognitive behavioural therapy reduce or increase distress in chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis? J Health Psychol. 2017 Aug;22(9):1177-1180. doi: 10.1177/1359105317710246. Epub 2017 May 17. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28805513

FITNET’s Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Is Ineffective and May Impede Natural Recovery in Adolescents with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. A Review

Abstract:

The Dutch Fatigue In Teenagers on the interNET (FITNET) study claimed that after 6 months, internet based cognitive behaviour therapy in adolescents with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), led to a 63% recovery rate compared to 8% after usual care, and that this was maintained at long term follow up (LTFU).

Our reanalysis shows that their post-hoc definition of recovery included the severely ill, the unblinded trial had no adequate control group and it used lax selection criteria as well as outcomes assessed via questionnaires rather than objective outcomes, further contributing to exaggerated recovery figures. Their decision not to publish the actometer results might suggest that these did not back their recovery claims. Despite these bias creating methodological faults, the trial still found no significant difference in recovery rates (“~60%”) at LTFU, the trial’s primary goal.

This is similar to or worse than the documented 54-94% spontaneous recovery rates within 3-4 years, suggesting that both FITNET and usual care (consisting of cognitive behaviour and graded exercise therapies) are ineffective and might even impede natural recovery in adolescents with ME/CFS. This has implications for the upcoming costly NHS FITNET trial which is a blueprint of the Dutch study, exposing it to similar biases.

Source: Ghatineh S, Vink M. FITNET’s Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Is Ineffective and May Impede Natural Recovery in Adolescents with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. A Review. Behav Sci (Basel). 2017 Aug 11;7(3). pii: E52. doi: 10.3390/bs7030052. http://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/7/3/52 (Full article)

Cognitive behaviour therapy and objective assessments in chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

Most evaluations of cognitive behavioural therapy to treat people with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis rely exclusively on subjective self-report outcomes to evaluate whether treatment is effective. Few studies have used measures appropriate to assessing whether cognitive behavioural therapy changes in more objective measures. A review of studies incorporating objective measures suggests that there is a lack of evidence that cognitive behavioural therapy produces any improvement in a patient’s physical capabilities or other objective measures such as return to work. Future studies of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis should include some objective assessments as primary outcomes. If this is to include activity monitors, we first need a sound baseline dataset.

Source: Graham McPhee. Cognitive behaviour therapy and objective assessments in chronic fatigue syndrome. Journal of Health Psychology. First Published June 19, 2017. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1359105317707215