medical outcome – American ME and CFS Society

Cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome: Differences in treatment outcome between a tertiary treatment centre in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) reduces fatigue and disability in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). However, outcomes vary between studies, possibly because of differences in patient characteristics, treatment protocols, diagnostic criteria and outcome measures. The objective was to compare outcomes after CBT in tertiary treatment centres in the Netherlands (NL) and the United Kingdom (UK), using different treatment protocols but identical outcome measures, while controlling for differences in patient characteristics and diagnostic criteria.

METHODS: Consecutively referred CFS patients who received CBT were included (NL: n=293, UK: n=163). Uncontrolled effect sizes for improvement in fatigue (Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire), physical functioning (SF-36 physical functioning subscale) and social functioning (Work and Social Adjustment Scale) were compared. Multiple regression analysis was used to examine whether patient differences explained outcome differences between centres.

RESULTS: Effect sizes differed between centres for fatigue (Cohen’s D NL=1.74, 95% CI=1.52-1.95; UK=0.99, CI=0.73-1.25), physical functioning (NL=0.99, CI=0.81-1.18; UK=0.33, CI=0.08-0.58) and social functioning (NL=1.47, CI=1.26-1.69; UK=0.61, CI=0.35-0.86). Patients in the UK had worse physical functioning at baseline and there were minor demographic differences. These could not explain differences in centre outcome.

CONCLUSION: Effectiveness of CBT differed between treatment centres. Differences in treatment protocols may explain this and should be investigated to help further improve outcomes.

Source: Worm-Smeitink M, Nikolaus S, Goldsmith K, Wiborg J, Ali S, Knoop H, Chalder T. Cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome: Differences in treatment outcome between a tertiary treatment centre in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. J Psychosom Res. 2016 Aug;87:43-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2016.06.006. Epub 2016 Jun 11. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27411751

An investigation of victimization and the clinical course of chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

Medically unexplained syndromes, including chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), have been associated with victimization in childhood and adulthood. The purpose of this study was to examine the associations of victimization experiences in childhood and adulthood with functional status and illness severity in a sample of patients with CFS using longitudinal data. In the sample of 93 patients with CFS, childhood abuse and neglect had greater impact than adulthood victimization. Overall, victimization experiences in childhood demonstrated modest associations with clinical outcomes in CFS, although several victimization experiences were in the opposite direction of expectations. Victimization predicted worse outcomes, but not worsening outcomes over time.

Source: Johnson SK, Schmaling KB, Dmochowski J, Bernstein D. An investigation of victimization and the clinical course of chronic fatigue syndrome. J Health Psychol. 2010 Apr;15(3):351-61. Doi: 10.1177/1359105309349453. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20348356

NIH conference. Chronic fatigue syndrome research. Definition and medical outcome assessment

Abstract:

A workshop was held 18 to 19 March 1991 at the National Institutes of Health to address critical issues in research concerning the chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Case definition, confounding diagnoses, and medical outcome assessment by laboratory and other means were considered from the perspectives of key medical specialties involved in CFS research.

It was recommended that published Centers for Disease Control (CDC) case-definition criteria be modified to exclude fewer patients from analysis because of a history of psychiatric disorder. Specific recommendations were made concerning the inclusion or exclusion of other major confounding diagnoses, and a standard panel of laboratory tests was specified for initial patient evaluation.

The workshop emphasized the importance of recognizing other conditions that could explain the patient’s symptoms and that may be treatable. It was viewed as essential for the investigator to screen for psychiatric disorder using a combination of self-report instruments followed by at least one structured interview to identify patients who should be excluded from studies or considered as a separate subgroup in data analysis.

Because CFS is not a homogeneous abnormality and because there is no single pathogenic mechanism, research progress may depend upon delineation of these and other patient subgroups for separate data analysis. Despite preliminary data, no physical finding or laboratory test was deemed confirmatory of the diagnosis of CFS.

For assessment of clinical status, investigators must rely on the use of standardized instruments for patient self-reporting of fatigue, mood disturbance, functional status, sleep disorder, global well-being, and pain. Further research is needed to develop better instruments for quantifying these domains in patients with CFS.

Source: Schluederberg A, Straus SE, Peterson P, Blumenthal S, Komaroff AL, Spring SB, Landay A, Buchwald D. NIH conference. Chronic fatigue syndrome research. Definition and medical outcome assessment. Ann Intern Med. 1992 Aug 15;117(4):325-31. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1322076