Comparison of adaptive pacing therapy, cognitive behaviour therapy, graded exercise therapy, and specialist medical care for chronic fatigue syndrome (PACE): a randomised trial

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Trial findings show cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy (GET) can be effective treatments for chronic fatigue syndrome, but patients’ organisations have reported that these treatments can be harmful and favour pacing and specialist health care. We aimed to assess effectiveness and safety of all four treatments.

METHODS: In our parallel-group randomised trial, patients meeting Oxford criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome were recruited from six secondary-care clinics in the UK and randomly allocated by computer-generated sequence to receive specialist medical care (SMC) alone or with adaptive pacing therapy (APT), CBT, or GET. Primary outcomes were fatigue (measured by Chalder fatigue questionnaire score) and physical function (measured by short form-36 subscale score) up to 52 weeks after randomisation, and safety was assessed primarily by recording all serious adverse events, including serious adverse reactions to trial treatments. Primary outcomes were rated by participants, who were necessarily unmasked to treatment assignment; the statistician was masked to treatment assignment for the analysis of primary outcomes. We used longitudinal regression models to compare SMC alone with other treatments, APT with CBT, and APT with GET. The final analysis included all participants for whom we had data for primary outcomes. This trial is registered at http://isrctn.org, number ISRCTN54285094.

FINDINGS: We recruited 641 eligible patients, of whom 160 were assigned to the APT group, 161 to the CBT group, 160 to the GET group, and 160 to the SMC-alone group. Compared with SMC alone, mean fatigue scores at 52 weeks were 3·4 (95% CI 1·8 to 5·0) points lower for CBT (p = 0·0001) and 3·2 (1·7 to 4·8) points lower for GET (p = 0·0003), but did not differ for APT (0·7 [-0·9 to 2·3] points lower; p = 0·38). Compared with SMC alone, mean physical function scores were 7·1 (2·0 to 12·1) points higher for CBT (p = 0·0068) and 9·4 (4·4 to 14·4) points higher for GET (p = 0·0005), but did not differ for APT (3·4 [-1·6 to 8·4] points lower; p=0·18). Compared with APT, CBT and GET were associated with less fatigue (CBT p = 0·0027; GET p = 0·0059) and better physical function (CBT p=0·0002; GET p<0·0001). Subgroup analysis of 427 participants meeting international criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome and 329 participants meeting London criteria for myalgic encephalomyelitis yielded equivalent results. Serious adverse reactions were recorded in two (1%) of 159 participants in the APT group, three (2%) of 161 in the CBT group, two (1%) of 160 in the GET group, and two (1%) of 160 in the SMC-alone group.

INTERPRETATION: CBT and GET can safely be added to SMC to moderately improve outcomes for chronic fatigue syndrome, but APT is not an effective addition.

FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council, Department of Health for England, Scottish Chief Scientist Office, Department for Work and Pensions.

Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Comment in:

 

Source: White PD, Goldsmith KA, Johnson AL, Potts L, Walwyn R, DeCesare JC, Baber HL, Burgess M, Clark LV, Cox DL, Bavinton J, Angus BJ, Murphy G, Murphy M, O’Dowd H, Wilks D, McCrone P, Chalder T, Sharpe M; PACE trial management group. Collaborators (19). Comparison of adaptive pacing therapy, cognitive behaviour therapy, graded exercise therapy, and specialist medical care for chronic fatigue syndrome (PACE): a randomised trial. Lancet. 2011 Mar 5;377(9768):823-36. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60096-2. Epub 2011 Feb 18. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3065633/ (Full article)

 

Fatigue In Teenagers on the interNET–the FITNET Trial. A randomized clinical trial of web-based cognitive behavioural therapy for adolescents with chronic fatigue syndrome: study protocol

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) is increasingly recognized as a cause of disability and inactivity in adolescents in the Netherlands. CFS is characterized by unexplained fatigue lasting more than 6 months. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) has proven to be effective. However, CBT availability for adolescents with CFS is limited and requires special therapeutic skills not always readily available. An alternative to the face-to-face CBT is FITNET, a web-based therapeutic program designed specifically for adolescents diagnosed with CFS, and their parents. This new CBT approach appeals to the modern youth, who grow up with internet as their main source of information. A web-based program offers the opportunity to lower thresholds for the acceptance and realization of healthcare. This treatment can be activated at any chosen time. The communication between patient and therapist can elapse asynchronously. If effective, this web-based program would greatly increase the therapeutic accessibility.

METHODS/DESIGN: A randomized clinical trial is currently conducted. One-hundred-forty adolescents aged 12-18 years diagnosed with CFS will be recruited and randomized to one of two groups: FITNET or usual care. After 6 months, the usual care group will have access to the FITNET program. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, post intervention, and at 6 months follow-up. Primary outcome measures are school presence, fatigue severity, and physical functioning.

DISCUSSION: The FITNET study is the first randomized clinical trial which evaluates the effect of web-based CBT versus usual care in adolescents with CFS. The intervention is based on a theoretical existing model of CBT for patients with CFS. The results of this study will provide information about the possibility and efficacy of web-based CBT for adolescents with CFS and will reveal predictors of efficacy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: ISRCTN59878666 and ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00893438.

 

Source: Nijhof SL, Bleijenberg G, Uiterwaal CS, Kimpen JL, van de Putte EM. Fatigue In Teenagers on the interNET–the FITNET Trial. A randomized clinical trial of web-based cognitive behavioural therapy for adolescents with chronic fatigue syndrome: study protocol. [ISRCTN59878666]. BMC Neurol. 2011 Feb 19;11:23. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-11-23. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3049137/ (Full article)

 

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

Abstract:

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) produces physical and neurocognitive disability that significantly affects health-related quality of life (HRQL). Multidisciplinary treatment combining graded exercise therapy (GET) cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and pharmacological treatment has shown only short-term improvements.

Aim: To compare the effects on HRQL of (1) multidisciplinary treatment combining CBT, GET, and pharmacological treatment, and (2) usual treatment (exercise counselling and pharmacological treatment) at 12 months of follow-up.

Design: Prospective, randomized controlled trial with a follow-up of 12 months after the end of treatment.

Method: Patients consecutively diagnosed with CFS (Fukuda criteria) were randomly assigned to intervention (n = 60) or usual treatment (n = 60) groups. HRQL was assessed at baseline and 12 months by the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form questionnaire (SF-36). Secondary outcomes included functional capacity for activities of daily living measured by the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and comorbidities.

Results: At baseline, the two groups were similar, except for lower SF-36 emotional role scores in the intervention group. At 12 months, the intervention did not improve HRQL scores, with worse SF-36 physical function and bodily pain scores in the intervention group.

Conclusion: Multidisciplinary treatment was not superior to usual treatment at 12 months in terms of HRQL. The possible benefits of GET as part of multidisciplinary treatment for CFS should be assessed on an individual patient basis.

 

Source: Núñez M, Fernández-Solà J, Nuñez E, Fernández-Huerta JM, Godás-Sieso T, Gomez-Gil E. 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. 2011 Mar;30(3):381-9. doi: 10.1007/s10067-010-1677-y. Epub 2011 Jan 15. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21234629

For a list of references seehttp://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10067-010-1677-y

 

Effectiveness of stepped care for chronic fatigue syndrome: a randomized noninferiority trial

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: In this randomized noninferiority study, the effectiveness and efficiency of stepped care for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) was compared to care as usual. Stepped care was formed by guided self-instruction, followed by cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) if the patient desired it. Care as usual encompassed CBT after a waiting period.

METHOD: A total of 171 CFS patients were randomly allocated to stepped care or care as usual. Patients in both conditions were assessed 3 times: at baseline, after guided self-instruction or the waiting period, and after CBT. The primary outcome variables were fatigue severity (Checklist Individual Strength) and disabilities (Sickness Impact Profile and Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36).

RESULTS: An intention to treat analysis showed that stepped care (N = 84) for CFS is noninferior to care as usual (N = 85). Both conditions were equivalent in reducing fatigue severity, reducing disabilities, and increasing physical functioning. The treatment results of both conditions were in accordance with those of previous randomized controlled trials testing the effectiveness of CBT for CFS. The total therapist time needed to treat a patient was significantly less in the stepped care condition.

CONCLUSIONS: Stepped care is as effective as CBT and is more time efficient for the therapist.

Copyright 2010 APA, all rights reserved.

 

Source: Tummers M, Knoop H, Bleijenberg G. Effectiveness of stepped care for chronic fatigue syndrome: a randomized noninferiority trial. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2010 Oct;78(5):724-31. doi: 10.1037/a0020052. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20873907

 

Possible detrimental effects of cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) can decrease the level of fatigue and disabilities, but it has been suggested that during therapy some patients experience a deterioration of their symptoms rather than an improvement. The aim of this study is to examine the frequency and severity of symptom deterioration during CBT for CFS.

METHODS: Data from 3 randomised controlled trials on CBT for CFS were pooled and reanalysed. Symptom deterioration during the trial was rated by patients and measured as deterioration in fatigue, pain, functional impairment and psychological distress. Both the frequency and severity of deterioration in these domains were compared between the patients receiving CBT and those in the control group. Predictors of symptom deterioration were identified by comparing their means in patients with and without an increase in fatigue. Statistically significant predictors were then combined in a logistic regression model.

RESULTS: The frequency of symptom deterioration varied from 2 to 12% in patients receiving CBT and from 7 to 17% in the control group. None of the measures showed a significantly higher frequency of symptom deterioration in the CBT group. The severity of deterioration was also comparable in the CBT and in the control group. No predictors of symptom deterioration specific to CBT were found.

CONCLUSION: Patients receiving CBT do not experience more frequent or more severe symptom deterioration than untreated patients. The reported deterioration during CBT seems to reflect the natural variation in symptoms. Thus, CBT is not only a helpful, but also a safe treatment for CFS.

Copyright 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Comment in: Harms of cognitive behaviour therapy designed to increase activity levels in chronic fatigue syndrome: questions remain.[Psychother Psychosom. 2011]

 

Source: Heins MJ, Knoop H, Prins JB, Stulemeijer M, van der Meer JW, Bleijenberg G. Possible detrimental effects of cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome. Psychother Psychosom. 2010 Jun;79(4):249-56. doi: 10.1159/000315130. Epub 2010 May 25. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20502065

 

Chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, and related illnesses: a clinical model of assessment and intervention

Abstract:

A clinically informative behavioral literature on chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and fibromyalgia (FM) has emerged over the past decade. The purpose of this article is to (a) define these conditions and their less severe counterparts, i.e., unexplained chronic fatigue (UCF) and chronic widespread pain; (b) briefly review the behavioral theory and intervention literature on CFS and FM; and (c) describe a user-friendly clinical model of assessment and intervention for these illnesses. The assessments described will facilitate understanding of the somewhat unusual and puzzling somatic presentations that characterize these patients. Using an individualized cognitive-behavioral approach the mental health clinician can offer significant help to these often stigmatized and medically underserved patients.

(c) 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

 

Source: Friedberg F. Chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, and related illnesses: a clinical model of assessment and intervention. J Clin Psychol. 2010 Jun;66(6):641-65. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20676. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20186721

 

How does cognitive behaviour therapy reduce fatigue in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome? The role of physical activity

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) is known to reduce fatigue severity in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). How this change in symptomatology is accomplished is not yet understood. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether the effect of CBT on fatigue is mediated by an increase in physical activity.

METHOD: Three randomized controlled trials were reanalysed, previously conducted to evaluate the efficacy of CBT for CFS. In all samples, actigraphy was used to assess the level of physical activity prior and subsequent to treatment or a control group period. The mediation hypothesis was analysed according to guidelines of Baron & Kenny [Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (1986)51, 1173-1182]. A non-parametric bootstrap approach was used to test statistical significance of the mediation effect.

RESULTS: Although CBT effectively reduced fatigue, it did not change the level of physical activity. Furthermore, changes in physical activity were not related to changes in fatigue. Across the samples, the mean mediation effect of physical activity averaged about 1% of the total treatment effect. This effect did not yield significance in any of the samples.

CONCLUSIONS: The effect of CBT on fatigue in CFS is not mediated by a persistent increase in physical activity.

 

Source: Wiborg JF, Knoop H, Stulemeijer M, Prins JB, Bleijenberg G. How does cognitive behaviour therapy reduce fatigue in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome? The role of physical activity. Psychol Med. 2010 Aug;40(8):1281-7. doi: 10.1017/S0033291709992212. Epub 2010 Jan 5. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20047707

 

Family-focused cognitive behaviour therapy versus psycho-education for chronic fatigue syndrome in 11- to 18-year-olds: a randomized controlled treatment trial

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Only one previous randomized controlled trial (RCT) has examined the efficacy of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) in children. The aim of this study was to compare family-focused CBT with psycho-education for CFS in adolescents.

METHOD: Sixty-three 11- to 18-year-olds (43 girls, 20 boys) with CFS were randomly assigned to either family-focused CBT or psycho-education delivered over 6 months. School attendance was the main outcome, which was assessed at the end of treatment and at 3, 6 and 12 months follow-up.

RESULTS: At the main outcome point (the 6-month follow-up) both groups had improved similarly. However, although those who received family-focused CBT were attending school for longer than those who received psycho-education, at discharge from treatment and at 3 months follow-up, they improved less quickly across the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents with CFS get back to school more quickly after family-focused CBT. This is important as they are at a crucial stage of their development. However, the finding that psycho-education was as effective as family-focused CBT at 6 and 12 months follow-up has important implications for health service delivery.

 

Source: Chalder T, Deary V, Husain K, Walwyn R. Family-focused cognitive behaviour therapy versus psycho-education for chronic fatigue syndrome in 11- to 18-year-olds: a randomized controlled treatment trial. Psychol Med. 2010 Aug;40(8):1269-79. doi: 10.1017/S003329170999153X. Epub 2009 Nov 6. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19891804

 

Chronic fatigue syndrome: la bête noire of the Belgian health care system

Abstract:

The World Health Organization acknowledges Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME)/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) to be a medical illness. ME/CFS is characterized by disorders in the inflammatory and oxidative and nitrosative stress (IO&NS) pathways. In 2002, the Belgian government started with the development of CFS “Reference Centers”, which implement a “psychosocial” model. The medical practices of these CFS Centers are defined by the Superior Health Council, e.g. treatment should be based upon Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and Graded Exercise Therapy (GET); and biological assessments and treatments of ME/CFS should not be employed.

Recently, the Belgian government has evaluated the outcome of the treatments at the CFS Centers. They concluded that a “rehabilitation therapy” with CBT/GET yielded no significant efficacy in the treatment of ME/CFS and that CBT/GET cannot be considered to be curative therapies.

In case reports, we have shown that patients who were “treated” at those CFS centers with CBT/GET in fact suffered from IO&NS disorders, including intracellular inflammation, an increased translocation of gram-negative enterobacteria (leaky gut), autoimmune reactions and damage by O&NS.

Considering the fact that these findings are exemplary for ME/CFS patients and that GET may even be harmful, it means that many patients are maltreated by the Belgian CFS Centers. Notwithstanding the above, the government and the CFS Centers not only continue this unethical and immoral policy, but also reinforce their use of CBT/GET in patients with ME/CFS treated at those Centers.

 

Source: Maes M, Twisk FN. Chronic fatigue syndrome: la bête noire of the Belgian health care system. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2009;30(3):300-11. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19855351

 

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 with ME/CFS

Abstract:

Benign Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) / Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) is a debilitating disease which, despite numerous biological abnormalities has remained highly controversial. Notwithstanding the medical pathogenesis of ME/CFS, the (bio)psychosocial model is adopted by many governmental organizations and medical professionals to legitimize the combination of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and Graded Exercise Therapy (GET) for ME/CFS. Justified by this model CBT and GET aim at eliminating presumed psychogenic and socially induced maintaining factors and reversing deconditioning, respectively.

In this review we invalidate the (bio)psychosocial model for ME/CFS and demonstrate that the success claim for CBT/GET to treat ME/CFS is unjust. CBT/GET is not only hardly more effective than non-interventions or standard medical care, but many patients report that the therapy had affected them adversely, the majority of them even reporting substantial deterioration.

Moreover, this review shows that exertion and thus GET most likely have a negative impact on many ME/CFS patients. Exertion induces post-exertional malaise with a decreased physical performance/aerobic capacity, increased muscoskeletal pain, neurocognitive impairment, “fatigue”, and weakness, and a long lasting “recovery” time.

This can be explained by findings that exertion may amplify pre-existing pathophysiological abnormalities underpinning ME/CFS, such as inflammation, immune dysfunction, oxidative and nitrosative stress, channelopathy, defective stress response mechanisms and a hypoactive hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis.

We conclude that it is unethical to treat patients with ME/CFS with ineffective, non-evidence-based and potentially harmful “rehabilitation therapies”, such as CBT/GET.

 

Source: Twisk FN, 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 with ME/CFS. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2009;30(3):284-99. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19855350