Tag: mixed methods

Mixed methods system for the assessment of post-exertional malaise in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome: an exploratory study

Abstract:

Background A central feature of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is post-exertional malaise (PEM), which is an acute worsening of symptoms after a physical, emotional and/or mental exertion. Dynamic measures of PEM have historically included scaled questionnaires, which have not been validated in ME/CFS. To enhance our understanding of PEM and how best to measure it, we conducted semistructured qualitative interviews (QIs) at the same intervals as visual analogue scale (VAS) measures after a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET).

Methods Ten ME/CFS and nine healthy volunteers participated in a CPET. For each volunteer, PEM symptom VAS (12 symptoms) and semistructured QIs were administered at six timepoints over 72 hours before and after a single CPET. QI data were used to plot the severity of PEM at each time point and identify the self-described most bothersome symptom for each ME/CFS volunteer. Performance of QI and VAS data was compared with each other using Spearman correlations.

Results Each ME/CFS volunteer had a unique PEM experience, with differences noted in the onset, severity, trajectory over time and most bothersome symptom. No healthy volunteers experienced PEM. QI and VAS fatigue data corresponded well an hour prior to exercise (pre-CPET, r=0.7) but poorly at peak PEM (r=0.28) and with the change from pre-CPET to peak (r=0.20). When the most bothersome symptom identified from QIs was used, these correlations improved (r=0.0.77, 0.42. and 0.54, respectively) and reduced the observed VAS scale ceiling effects.

Conclusion In this exploratory study, QIs were able to capture changes in PEM severity and symptom quality over time, even when VAS scales failed to do so. Measurement of PEM can be improved by using a quantitative–qualitative mixed model approach.

Source: Stussman B, Calco B, Norato G, et al. Mixed methods system for the assessment of post-exertional malaise in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome: an exploratory study. BMJ Neurology Open 2024;6:e000529. doi: 10.1136/bmjno-2023-000529  https://neurologyopen.bmj.com/content/6/1/e000529 (Full text)

Prevalence of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) in Australian primary care patients: only part of the story?

Abstract:

Background: ME/CFS is a disorder characterized by recurrent fatigue and intolerance to exertion which manifests as profound post-exertional malaise. Prevalence studies internationally have reported highly variable results due to the 20 + diagnostic criteria. For Australia, the prevalence of ME/CFS based on current case definitions is unknown.

Objectives: To report prevalence of ME/CFS in patients aged ≥ 13 years attending Australian primary care settings for years 2015-2019, and provide context for patterns of primary care attendance by people living with ME/CFS.

Methodology: Conducted in partnership with the Patient Advisory Group, this study adopted a mixed methods approach. De-identified primary care data from the national MedicineInsight program were analyzed. The cohort were regularly attending patients, i.e. 3 visits in the preceding 2 years. Crude prevalence rates were calculated for years 2015-2019, by sex, 10-year age groups, remoteness and socioeconomic status. Rates are presented per 100,000population (95% confidence intervals (CI)). Qualitative data was collected through focus groups and in-depth 1:1 interview.

Results: Qualitative evidence identified barriers to reaching diagnosis, and limited interactions with primary care due to a lack of available treatments/interventions, stigma and disbelief in ME/CFS as a condition. In each year of interest, crude prevalence in the primary care setting ranged between 94.9/100,000 (95% CI: 91.5-98.5) and 103.9/100,000 population (95%CI: 100.3-107.7), equating to between 20,140 and 22,050 people living with ME/CFS in Australia in 2020. Higher rates were observed for age groups 50-59 years and 40-49 years. Rates were substantially higher in females (130.0-141.4/100,000) compared to males (50.9-57.5/100,000). In the context of the qualitative evidence, our prevalence rates likely represent an underestimate of the true prevalence of ME/CFS in the Australian primary care setting.

Conclusion: ME/CFS affects a substantial number of Australians. Whilst this study provides prevalence estimates for the Australian primary care setting, the qualitative evidence highlights the limitations of these. Future research should focus on using robust case ascertainment criteria in a community setting. Quantification of the burden of disease can be used to inform health policy and planning, for this understudied condition.

Source: Orji N, Campbell JA, Wills K, Hensher M, Palmer AJ, Rogerson M, Kelly R, de Graaff B. Prevalence of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) in Australian primary care patients: only part of the story? BMC Public Health. 2022 Aug 9;22(1):1516. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13929-9. PMID: 35945527. https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-022-13929-9 (Full text)

The use of mixed methods in studying a chronic illness

Abstract:

This article explores mixed methods approaches with an illness called Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). Qualitative and Quantitative data were used to investigate the epidemiology of this illness, as well as explore attributions based on the name of the illness, and finally treatment approaches.

In each of the domains within the ME and CFS research reviewed, our analyses were richer and our findings ultimately more impactful when we integrated qualitative and quantitative research methods. The use of a multiphase mixed methods research program provided our team unique vantage points for better understanding social and community issues involving this controversial chronic illness.

Further, this approach allowed us to implement the insights gained through an advocacy lens to change policy, recommend and evaluate treatments, and amplify voices within the patient population. In this way, we believe that the practice of methodological pluralism is especially applicable and effective to the study of chronic illness, and believe other investigators will benefit from the use of these approaches with similar disenfranchised and unfairly treated populations.

 

Source: Jason LA, Reed J. The use of mixed methods in studying a chronic illness. Health Psychol Behav Med. 2015;3(1):40-51. Epub 2015 Jan 9. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4831644/ (Full article)