CBT – Page 13 – American ME and CFS Society

Long-term outcome of cognitive behavior therapy versus relaxation therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome: a 5-year follow-up study

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the long-term outcome of cognitive behavior therapy versus relaxation therapy for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome.

METHOD: Sixty patients who participated in a randomized controlled trial of cognitive behavior therapy versus relaxation therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome were invited to complete self-rated measures and participate in a 5-year follow-up interview with an assessor who was blind to treatment type.

RESULTS: Fifty-three patients (88%) participated in the follow-up study: 25 received cognitive behavior therapy and 28 received relaxation therapy. A total of 68% of the patients who received cognitive behavior therapy and 36% who received relaxation therapy rated themselves as “much improved” or “very much improved” at the 5-year follow-up. Significantly more patients receiving cognitive behavior therapy, in relation to those in relaxation therapy, met criteria for complete recovery, were free of relapse, and experienced symptoms that had steadily improved or were consistently mild or absent since treatment ended. Similar proportions were employed, but patients in the cognitive behavior therapy group worked significantly more mean hours per week. Few patients crossed the threshold for “normal” fatigue, despite achieving a good outcome on other measures. Cognitive behavior therapy was positively evaluated and was still used by over 80% of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive behavior therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome can produce some lasting benefits but is not a cure. Once therapy ends, some patients have difficulty making further improvements. In the future, attention should be directed toward ensuring that gains are maintained and extended after regular treatment ends.

Source: Deale A, Husain K, Chalder T, Wessely S. Long-term outcome of cognitive behavior therapy versus relaxation therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome: a 5-year follow-up study. Am J Psychiatry. 2001 Dec;158(12):2038-42. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11729022

Cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome in a general hospital–feasible and effective

Abstract:

Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) has been shown to be effective in recent randomized controlled trials for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). We examined the effectiveness of CBT in a general hospital setting in a retrospective questionnaire follow-up study of 94 patients offered CBT by liaison psychiatry services. The questionnaire response rate was 61%.

Eighteen percent had returned to normal functioning at follow-up. For the group as a whole, there was a significant improvement in the functional and social impairment and the number of frequently experienced symptoms. Those in work or study at follow-up was 53% (29% pretreatment), and 65% of patients mentioned occupational stress as a contributory factor in their illness. There was a significant reduction in the frequency of attendance at primary care in the year after the end of CBT.

We conclude that cognitive behavioral therapy is an acceptable treatment for most patients and can be used in a general hospital outpatient setting by a variety of trained therapists. However, a proportion of patients do not benefit and remain significantly disabled by the condition.

Source: Akagi H, Klimes I, Bass C. Cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome in a general hospital–feasible and effective. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2001 Sep-Oct;23(5):254-60. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11600166

Interventions for the treatment and management of chronic fatigue syndrome: a systematic review

Erratum in: JAMA 2002 Mar 20;287(11):1401.

Abstract:

CONTEXT: A variety of interventions have been used in the treatment and management of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Currently, debate exists among health care professionals and patients about appropriate strategies for management.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of all interventions that have been evaluated for use in the treatment or management of CFS in adults or children.

DATA SOURCES: Nineteen specialist databases were searched from inception to either January or July 2000 for published or unpublished studies in any language. The search was updated through October 2000 using PubMed. Other sources included scanning citations, Internet searching, contacting experts, and online requests for articles.

STUDY SELECTION: Controlled trials (randomized or nonrandomized) that evaluated interventions in patients diagnosed as having CFS according to any criteria were included. Study inclusion was assessed independently by 2 reviewers. Of 350 studies initially identified, 44 met inclusion criteria, including 36 randomized controlled trials and 8 controlled trials.

DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction was conducted by 1 reviewer and checked by a second. Validity assessment was carried out by 2 reviewers with disagreements resolved by consensus. A qualitative synthesis was carried out and studies were grouped according to type of intervention and outcomes assessed.

DATA SYNTHESIS: The number of participants included in each trial ranged from 12 to 326, with a total of 2801 participants included in the 44 trials combined. Across the studies, 38 different outcomes were evaluated using about 130 different scales or types of measurement. Studies were grouped into 6 different categories. In the behavioral category, graded exercise therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy showed positive results and also scored highly on the validity assessment. In the immunological category, both immunoglobulin and hydrocortisone showed some limited effects but, overall, the evidence was inconclusive. There was insufficient evidence about effectiveness in the other 4 categories (pharmacological, supplements, complementary/alternative, and other interventions).

CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the interventions demonstrated mixed results in terms of effectiveness. All conclusions about effectiveness should be considered together with the methodological inadequacies of the studies. Interventions which have shown promising results include cognitive behavioral therapy and graded exercise therapy. Further research into these and other treatments is required using standardized outcome measures.

Comment in:

Measuring the quality of trials of treatments for chronic fatigue syndrome. [JAMA. 2001]

Chronic fatigue syndrome–trials and tribulations. [JAMA. 2001]

Review: behavioural interventions show the most promise for chronic fatigue syndrome. [Evid Based Nurs. 2002]

Review: behavioral interventions show the most promise for the chronic fatigue syndrome. [ACP J Club. 2002]

Review: cognitive behavioural therapy and graded exercise show the most promise for chronic fatigue syndrome. [Evid Based Ment Health. 2002]

Source: Whiting P, Bagnall AM, Sowden AJ, Cornell JE, Mulrow CD, Ramírez G. Interventions for the treatment and management of chronic fatigue syndrome: a systematic review. JAMA. 2001 Sep 19;286(11):1360-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11560542

Chronic fatigue in general practice

Comment on: Chronic fatigue in general practice: is counselling as good as cognitive behaviour therapy? A UK randomised trial. [Br J Gen Pract. 2001]

Ridsdale and colleagues are to be congratulated on performing a randomised controlled trial of different treatments for chronic fatigue. However, their data do not substantiate their conclusions.

The trial was set up to demonstrate that cognitive behavioural therapy was better than counselling for patients seen in general practice with fatigue symptoms. No difference in the main outcome measures was found between the intervention and control groups. This has been interpreted as showing that the two treatments are equivalent. The sample size required for, and analysis of, equivalence studies are different than those required for trials designed to show differences,2 not least the requirement that equivalence be defined before the trial starts. This trial was not designed to show equivalence. Thus, although the results for the main outcome measures are similar they should not be reported as being equivalent. Without a definition of equivalence, calculating the study’s power to show equivalence is not possible. Also, part of the conclusions depend on a sub-group analysis which, while acknowledged as being underpowered, is given more weight than is justified. If equivalence is defined as six points on the fatigue score then, in this subgroup, the trial only has a power of 36% to show equivalence based on a 95% confidence interval. With a more conservative definition of equivalence even the main study lacks power.

You can read the rest of this comment here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1313987/pdf/11458490.pdf

Source: Underwood M, Eldridge S. Chronic fatigue in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Apr;51(465):317-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11458490

Cognitive behaviour therapy and chronic fatigue syndrome

Comment on: Chronic fatigue in general practice: is counselling as good as cognitive behaviour therapy? A UK randomised trial. [Br J Gen Pract. 2001]

Ridsdale and colleagues state that there is evidence that cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) is effective for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), but fail to point out that such evidence derives only from studies performed in the United Kingdom, where CFS is diagnosed on the basis of the Oxford criteria. There is no evidence that CBT is beneficial to patients fulfilling the Australian criteria for CFS or the American ones, namely, the original criteria of the Centers for Disease Control.

You can read the rest of this comment here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1313986/pdf/11458489.pdf

Source: Baschetti R. Cognitive behaviour therapy and chronic fatigue syndrome. Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Apr;51(465):316-7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1313986/ (Full comment)

Toward a new definition of chronic fatigue syndrome

To the editor,

I agree with Lane when he writes that the operative criteria for diagnosing chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) are unsatisfactory. Some patients who have been assigned this label may be better described as having depression or somatization, and this mislabeling prejudices the understanding of CFS in cross-sectional studies.1 Lane is presumably referring to the definition of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, with its concentration on physical symptoms.2 This definition also is not all that helpful in assigning a label to individuals for the purposes of estimating prognosis or deciding on treatment because the physical symptoms cited are nonspecific.

You can read the rest of this comment here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1071345/

Source: Robertson-Ritchie H. Toward a new definition of chronic fatigue syndrome. West J Med. 2001 Apr;174(4):241. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1071345/ (Full article)

Chronic fatigue in general practice: is counselling as good as cognitive behaviour therapy? A UK randomised trial

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Fatigue is a common symptom for which patients consult their doctors in primary care. With usual medical management the majority of patients report that their symptoms persist and become chronic. There is little evidence for the effectiveness of any fatigue management in primary care.

AIM: To compare the effectiveness of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) with counselling for patients with chronic fatigue and to describe satisfaction with care.

DESIGN OF STUDY: Randomised trial with parallel group design.

SETTING: Ten general practices located in London and the South Thames region of the United Kingdom recruited patients to the trial between 1996 and 1998. Patients came from a wide range of socioeconomic backgrounds and lived in urban, suburban, and rural areas.

METHOD: Data were collected before randomisation, after treatment, and six months later. Patients were offered six sessions of up to one hour each of either CBT or counselling. Outcomes include: self-report of fatigue symptoms six months later, anxiety and depression, symptom attributions, social adjustment and patients’ satisfaction with care.

RESULTS: One hundred and sixty patients with chronic fatigue entered the trial, 45 (28%) met research criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome; 129 completed follow-up. All patients met Chalder et al’s standard criteria for fatigue. Mean fatigue scores were 23 on entry (at baseline) and 15 at six months’ follow-up. Sixty-one (47%) patients no longer met standard criteria for fatigue after six months. There was no significant difference in effect between the two therapies on fatigue (1.04 [95% CI = -1.7 to 3.7]), anxiety and depression or social adjustment outcomes for all patients and for the subgroup with chronic fatigue syndrome. Use of antidepressants and consultations with the doctor decreased after therapy but there were no differences between groups.

CONCLUSION: Counselling and CBT were equivalent in effect for patients with chronic fatigue in primary care. The choice between therapies can therefore depend on other considerations, such as cost and accessibility.

Comment in:

Chronic fatigue in general practice. [Br J Gen Pract. 2001]

Cognitive behaviour therapy and chronic fatigue syndrome. [Br J Gen Pract. 2001]

Source: Ridsdale L, Godfrey E, Chalder T, Seed P, King M, Wallace P, Wessely S; Fatigue Trialists’ Group. Chronic fatigue in general practice: is counselling as good as cognitive behaviour therapy? A UK randomised trial. Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Jan;51(462):19-24. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1313894/ (Full article)

Cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome: a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) seems a promising treatment for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), but the applicability of this treatment outside specialised settings has been questioned. We compared CBT with guided support groups and the natural course in a randomised trial at three centres.

METHODS: Of 476 patients diagnosed with CFS, 278 were eligible and willing to take part. 93 were randomly assigned CBT (administered by 13 therapists recently trained in this technique for CFS), 94 were assigned the support-group approach, and 91 the control natural course. Multidimensional assessments were done at baseline, 8 months, and 14 months. The primary outcome variables were fatigue severity (on the checklist individual strength) and functional impairment (on the sickness impact profile) at 8 and 14 months. Data were analysed by intention to treat.

FINDINGS: 241 patients had complete data (83 CBT, 80 support groups, 78 natural course) at 8 months. At 14 months CBT was significantly more effective than both control conditions for fatigue severity (CBT vs support groups 5.8 [2.2-9.4]; CBT vs natural course 5.6 [2.1-9.0]) and for functional impairment (CBT vs support groups 263 [38-488]; CBT vs natural course 222 [3-441]). Support groups were not more effective for CFS patients than the natural course. Among the CBT group, clinically significant improvement was seen in fatigue severity for 20 of 58 (35%), in Karnofsky performance status for 28 of 57 (49%), and self-rated improvement for 29 of 58 (50%). Prognostic factors for outcome after CBT were a higher sense of control predicting more improvement, and a passive activity pattern and focusing on bodily symptoms predicting less improvement.

INTERPRETATION: CBT was more effective than guided support groups and the natural course in a multicentre trial with many therapists. Our study showed a lower proportion of patients with improvement than CBT trials with a few highly skilled therapists.

Comment in:

Cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome. [Lancet. 2001]

ACP J Club. 2001 Sep-Oct;135(2):47.

Cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome. [Lancet. 2001]

Source: Prins JB, Bleijenberg G, Bazelmans E, Elving LD, de Boo TM, Severens JL, van der Wilt GJ, Spinhoven P, van der Meer JW. Cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2001 Mar 17;357(9259):841-7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11265953

Causal attributions for somatic sensations in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and their partners

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) often make somatic attributions for their illness which has been associated with poor outcome. A tendency to make somatic attributions in general may be a vulnerability factor for the development of CFS.

METHODS: This cross-sectional study based on self-report questionnaire data aimed to investigate the type of attributions for symptoms made by patients with CFS and to compare this to attributions made by their partners. It was hypothesized that patients with CFS would make more somatic attributions for their own symptoms than control subjects and that partners of patients with CFS would make more somatic attributions for their ill relative’s symptoms but would be similar to controls regarding their own symptoms. Fifty patients with CFS were compared to 50 controls from a fracture clinic in the same hospital and 46 relatives living with the patients with CFS. A modified Symptom Interpretation Questionnaire was used to assess causal attributions.

RESULTS: CFS patients were more likely to make somatic attributions for their symptoms. The relatives of patients with CFS made significantly more somatic attributions for symptoms in their ill relative. However, they were like the fracture clinic controls in terms of making predominantly normalizing attributions for their own symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS: The data support modification of existing cognitive behavioural treatments for CFS to investigate whether addressing partners’ attributions for patients’ symptoms improves recovery in the patient. Furthermore, a tendency to make somatic attributions for symptoms may be a vulnerability factor for the development of CFS.

Source: Butler JA, Chalder T, Wessely S. Causal attributions for somatic sensations in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and their partners. Psychol Med. 2001 Jan;31(1):97-105. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11200964

Cognitive behaviour therapy for adults with chronic fatigue syndrome

Update in: Cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome in adults. [Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008]

Abstract:

OBJECTIVES: 1. To systematically review all randomised controlled trials of cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) for adults with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS); 2. To test the hypothesis that CBT is more effective than orthodox medical management or other interventions in adults with CFS.

SEARCH STRATEGY: 1. Electronic searching of bibliographic databases, including Medline, PsycLIT, Biological Abstracts, Embase, SIGLE, Index to Theses, Index to Scientific and Technical Proceedings, and Science Citation Index, using multiple search terms in order to perform a highly sensitive search. 2. Electronic searching of the Trials Register of the Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis group. 3. Citation lists of relevant studies and reviews were perused for other relevant trials. 4. Contact with the principal authors of relevant studies, and with researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials were included in which – adult patients with CFS; – received CBT or a control intervention, being either orthodox medical management or another intervention; – and whose outcomes were assessed in an appropriate way. CBT could be either type ‘A’ (encouraging return to ‘normal’ levels of rest and activity) or type ‘B’ (encouraging rest and activity which were within levels imposed by the disorder).’

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The two reviewers worked independently throughout the selection of trials and data extraction, comparing findings only when there was disagreement. Relevant trials were allocated to one of three quality categories. Full data extraction, using a standardised data extraction sheet, was performed on studies which were of high or moderate quality. Trials of low quality were excluded from the review. The comparisons made to test the review hypothesis were of type ‘A’ CBT versus other intervention(s), and of type ‘B’ CBT versus other intervention(s). Functional outcome was used as the main outcome for comparison, but other appropriate outcomes were compared where possible. Results were synthesised using the Review Manager software. For dichotomous data, the odds ratio was calculated for each study. For continuous data, effect sizes were obtained and the standardised mean difference, with 95% confidence intervals, was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS: Only three relevant trials of adequate quality were found. These trials demonstrated that CBT significantly benefits physical functioning in adult out-patients with CFS when compared to orthodox medical management or relaxation. It is necessary to treat about two patients to prevent one additional unsatisfactory physical outcome about six months after treatment end. CBT appeared highly acceptable to the patients in these trials. There is no satisfactory evidence for the effectiveness of CBT in patients with the milder forms of CFS found in primary care or in patients who are so disabled that they are unable to attend out-patients. Additionally, there is no satisfactory evidence for the effectiveness of group CBT.

REVIEWER’S CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive behaviour therapy appears to be an effective and acceptable treatment for adult out-patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. CFS is a common and disabling disorder. Its sufferers deserve the medical profession to be more aware of the potential of this therapy to bring lasting functional benefit, and health service managers to increase its availability. Further research is needed in this important area. Trials should conform to accepted standards of reporting and methodology. The effectiveness of CBT in more and less severely disabled patients than those usually seen in out-patient clinics needs to be assessed. Trials of group CBT and in-patient CBT compared to orthodox medical management, and of CBT compared to graded activity alone, also need to be conducted.

Source: Price JR, Couper J. Cognitive behaviour therapy for adults with chronic fatigue syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;(2):CD001027. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10796733