Tag: illness attribution

Longitudinal study of outcome of chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: To examine the predictors of long term outcome for patients with the chronic fatigue syndrome.

DESIGN: Cohort study.

SUBJECTS: 139 subjects previously enrolled in two treatment trials; 103 (74%) were reassessed a mean of 3.2 years after start of the trials.

SETTING: University hospital referral centre.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Age at onset, duration of illness, psychological and immunological status at initial assessment. Ongoing symptom severity, levels of disability, and immunological function at follow up.

RESULTS: 65 subjects had improved but only six reported no current symptoms. An alternative medical diagnosis had been made in two and psychiatric illness diagnosed in 20. The assignment of a primary psychiatric diagnosis at follow up and the strength of the belief that a physical disease process explained all symptoms at entry to the trials both predicted poor outcome. Age at onset of illness, duration of illness, neuroticism, premorbid psychiatric diagnoses, and cell mediated immune function did not predict outcome.

CONCLUSION: Though most patients with the chronic fatigue syndrome improve, a substantial proportion remain functionally impaired. Psychological factors such as illness attitudes and coping style seem more important predictors of long term outcome than immunological or demographic variables.

Comment in:

Chronic fatigue syndrome. Distinguish between syndromes… [BMJ. 1994]

Chronic fatigue syndrome. Immunological findings vary between populations. [BMJ. 1994]

Chronic fatigue syndrome. Role of psychological factors overemphasised. [BMJ. 1994]

 

Source: Wilson A, Hickie I, Lloyd A, Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Boughton C, Dwyer J, Wakefield D. Longitudinal study of outcome of chronic fatigue syndrome. BMJ. 1994 Mar 19;308(6931):756-9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2539669/

You can read the full article here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2539669/pdf/bmj00432-0032.pdf

 

Chronic fatigue syndrome: prevalence and outcome

This week’s journal contains two papers from multidisciplinary teams that shed light on syndromes of chronic fatigue and so move us towards resolving the often bitter controversy over myalgic encephalomyelitis. A large community survey by Pawlikowska and colleagues provides estimates of the prevalence of the symptom of fatigue,’ operationally defined chronic fatigue syndrome,2 and self declared (possibly self diagnosed) chronic fatigue syndrome in young and middle aged adults in south east England (p 763).1

They found that fatigue was common, occurred as a continuum, and was highly correlated with emotional distress. Most people attributed their fatigue to social or psychological factors. While 02% of the respondents reported that they had chronic fatigue syndrome, as many as 1% of respondents satisfied several of the criteria for the syndrome. As with many illnesses, the cases were found at the severe end of the continuum of fatigue, without any sharp cut off. Associations of self reported chronic fatigue syndrome with female sex and upper social class confirm what has been found in primary care and hospital studies 34 but are less typical in community surveys.’ 6 Previous studies have consistently identified a strong association between emotional morbidity and chronic fatigue syndrome,7 but this “is inevitable given the similarities of the criteria and the measures used to define them.”‘ Interestingly, the closer cases fulfil the definition of chronic fatigue syndrome the stronger the association with emotional morbidity.

Comment in:

Chronic fatigue syndrome. Prevalence study overlooked. [BMJ. 1994]

Chronic fatigue syndrome. …and study them separately. [BMJ. 1994]

Chronic fatigue syndrome. ME Association is honest about prognosis. [BMJ. 1994]

Comment on: Professional and popular views of chronic fatigue syndrome. [BMJ. 1994]

 

Source: Lawrie SM, Pelosi AJ. Chronic fatigue syndrome: prevalence and outcome. BMJ. 1994 Mar 19;308(6931):732-3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2539646/

You can read the full article here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2539646/pdf/bmj00432-0006.pdf

 

Measuring the functional impact of fatigue: initial validation of the fatigue impact scale

Abstract:

The fatigue impact scale (FIS) was developed to improve our understanding of the effects of fatigue on quality of life. The FIS examines patients’ perceptions of the functional limitations that fatigue has caused over the past month. FIS items reflect perceived impact on cognitive, physical, and psychosocial functioning.

This study compared 145 patients referred for investigation of chronic fatigue (ChF) with 105 patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and 34 patients with mild hypertension (HT). Internal consistency for the FIS and its three subscales was > .87 for all analyses. Fatigue impact was highest for the ChF group although the MS group’s reported fatigue also exceeded that of the HT group. Discriminant function analysis correctly classified 80.0% of the ChF group and 78.1% of the MS group when these groups were compared.

This initial validation study indicates that the FIS has considerable merit as a measure of patient’s attribution of functional limitations to symptoms of fatigue.

 

Source: Fisk JD, Ritvo PG, Ross L, Haase DA, Marrie TJ, Schlech. Measuring the functional impact of fatigue: initial validation of the fatigue impact scale. Clin Infect Dis. 1994 Jan;18 Suppl 1:S79-83. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8148458

 

Chronic fatigue in primary care attenders

Abstract:

From 686 patients attending primary care physicians, 77 were identified by a screening procedure as having chronic fatigue. Of these, 65 were given a comprehensive psychological, social and physical evaluation.

Seventeen cases (26%) met criteria for the chronic fatigue syndrome. Forty-seven (72%) received an ICD-9 diagnosis of whom 23 had neurotic depression, with a further 5 meeting criteria for neurasthenia.

Forty-nine were ‘cases’ as defined by the revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R), and 42 if the fatigue item was excluded. Psychiatric morbidity was more related to levels of social stresses than was severity of fatigue.

The main difference between these subjects and those examined in hospital settings is that the former are less liable to attribute their symptoms to wholly physical causes, including viruses, as opposed to social or psychological factors. Identification and management of persistent fatigue in primary care may prevent the secondary disabilities seen in patients with chronic fatigue syndromes.

 

Source: McDonald E, David AS, Pelosi AJ, Mann AH. Chronic fatigue in primary care attenders. Psychol Med. 1993 Nov;23(4):987-98. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8134522

 

Somatization, illness attribution and the sociocultural psychiatry of chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

In addition to epidemiological and neurobiological perspectives on the relationship between chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and psychiatric disorders there has been increasing interest in the role of cognitive-behavioural, psychological, psychodynamic and social factors in the psychiatric aspects of this syndrome. These factors may be important in the initiation and/or maintenance of CFS and play important roles in the misdiagnosis of primary psychopathology as CFS. They may be important targets for intervention and treatment.

This paper examines the relevance of the following issues for better understanding the relationship between CFS and the results of psychiatric studies: (1) the concepts of somatization and abnormal illness behaviour; (2) the role of patients’ illness attributions; (3) psychological and psychodynamic constructs such as depressive vulnerability occurring in individuals dependent upon achievement for the maintenance of self-esteem and euthymic mood, perfectionism, and helplessness; (4) the role of personality characteristics and styles; (5) the potential iatrogenic role of the health care system in producing disability in individuals with a diagnosis of CFS; (6) the role of the media and other sociocultural forces in the patient’s choice of the CFS label; and (7) the impact of the CFS label on the patient. The importance of differentiating between initiating and maintaining or perpetuating factors is emphasized.

 

Source: Abbey SE. Somatization, illness attribution and the sociocultural psychiatry of chronic fatigue syndrome. Ciba Found Symp. 1993;173:238-52; discussion 252-61. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8491101