Tag: cognitive therapy

Systematic review of mental health interventions for patients with common somatic symptoms: can research evidence from secondary care be extrapolated to primary care?

Abstract:

OBJECTIVES: To determine the strength of evidence for the effectiveness of mental health interventions for patients with three common somatic conditions (chronic fatigue syndrome, irritable bowel syndrome, and chronic back pain). To assess whether results obtained in secondary care can be extrapolated to primary care and suggest how future trials should be designed to provide more rigorous evidence.

DESIGN: Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES: Five electronic databases, key texts, references in the articles identified, and citations from expert clinicians.

STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled trials including participants with one of the three conditions for which no physical cause could be found. Two reviewers screened sources and independently extracted data and assessed quality.

RESULTS: Sixty one studies were identified; 20 were classified as primary care and 41 as secondary care. For some interventions, such as brief psychodynamic interpersonal therapy, little research was identified. However, results of meta-analyses and of randomised controlled trials suggest that cognitive behaviour therapy and behaviour therapy are effective for chronic back pain and chronic fatigue syndrome and that antidepressants are effective for irritable bowel syndrome. Cognitive behaviour therapy and behaviour therapy were effective in both primary and secondary care in patients with back pain, although the evidence is more consistent and the effect size larger for secondary care. Antidepressants seem effective in irritable bowel syndrome in both settings but ineffective in chronic fatigue syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS: Treatment seems to be more effective in patients in secondary care than in primary care. This may be because secondary care patients have more severe disease, they receive a different treatment regimen, or the intervention is more closely supervised. However, conclusions of effectiveness should be considered in the light of the methodological weaknesses of the studies. Large pragmatic trials are needed of interventions delivered in primary care by appropriately trained primary care staff.

Comment in: Review: cognitive behavioural interventions may be effective for chronic fatigue syndrome and chronic back pain. [Evid Based Ment Health. 2003]

 

Source: Raine R, Haines A, Sensky T, Hutchings A, Larkin K, Black N. Systematic review of mental health interventions for patients with common somatic symptoms: can research evidence from secondary care be extrapolated to primary care? BMJ. 2002 Nov 9;325(7372):1082. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC131187/ (Full article)

 

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

 

Non-pharmacological approaches to treatment

Abstract:

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) as currently defined overlaps with other syndromes including chronic pain, fibromyalgia, anxiety and depression. It also resembles historical descriptions of neurasthenia. The role of psychological (cognitive) and behavioural therapies in CFS is examined.

There are both pragmatic and theoretical arguments for their application to CFS. It is pragmatic to target obvious and treatable factors including inactivity and depression. A theoretical model in which psychological, physiological and social factors interact offers a plausible rationale for such treatment but is not yet empirically proven. While there is evidence for the efficacy of this type of therapy in related syndromes, the evidence in CFS is inconclusive.

A randomized controlled trial of combined cognitive and behavioural therapy currently in progress is described. Initial results suggest that most patients receiving cognitive behaviour therapy improve, especially in terms of functional impairment. It remains to be seen whether this therapy will prove to be more effective than standard general practitioner care. In the meantime cognitive behaviour therapy offers a pragmatic and rational therapy for patients with CFS.

 

Source: Sharpe M. Non-pharmacological approaches to treatment. Ciba Found Symp. 1993;173:298-308; discussion 308-17. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8491104

 

Chronic fatigue syndrome

Comment on: Chronic fatigue syndrome. [J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1991]

 

As neurologists in a country where the chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) has almost no recognized official existence, we often feel bewildered by the papers on the subject we read in the Anglo-Saxon literature. We wonder whether the clinical experience of some of their authors is so different from ours that they do not consider that their approach may result in a disservice to their patients. The JNNP has followed a sensitive line culminating in Wessely’s excellent editorial. We still, however, feel that his kid-glove handling of the subject reflects the controversy that surrounds it in the UK.

Avoiding the futile organic versus functional debate, in our neurology department we refer to many of the problems we see in our practice as the “chronic vigilance syndromes”: specific patterns of enhanced attention centred on particular bodily structures and functions. Naturally, the commonest in a neurologist’s outpatient clinic are the “cephalic vigilance syndromes” in their two main forms: the painful, with its several varieties of chronic headaches, and the operational one with its subjective unsteadiness, concentration problems and various odd turns. “Thoracic vigilance” patients are often referred to cardiologists or pneumologists but a fair number also come to us, especially if they have hyperventilation symptoms such as dizziness and paraesthesiae. Among the different types of patients with fatigue we are also familiar with the occasional “neuro-muscular vigilance” patient whose symptoms parallel your CFS cases. We have the noncontrolled impression that in our environment such patients often have a premorbid preoccupation with their locomotor system.

You can read the rest of this comment here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC488951/pdf/jnnpsyc00486-0096a.pdf

 

Source: Digon A, Goicoechea A, Moraza MJ. Chronic fatigue syndrome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1992 Jan;55(1):85. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC488951/