Tag: Vink

Cognitive behavioural therapy for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome is not effective. Re-analysis of a Cochrane review

Abstract:

Analysis of the 2008 Cochrane review of cognitive behavioural therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome shows that seven patients with mild chronic fatigue syndrome need to be treated for one to report a small, short-lived subjective improvement of fatigue. This is not matched by an objective improvement of physical fitness or employment and illness benefit status. Most studies in the Cochrane review failed to report on safety or adverse reactions. Patient evidence suggests adverse outcomes in 20 per cent of cases. If a trial of a drug or surgical procedure uncovered a similar high rate, it would be unlikely to be accepted as safe. It is time to downgrade cognitive behavioural therapy to an adjunct support-level therapy, rather than a treatment for chronic fatigue syndrome.

Source: Vink M, Vink-Niese A. Cognitive behavioural therapy for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome is not effective. Re-analysis of a Cochrane review. Health Psychol Open. 2019 May 2;6(1):2055102919840614. doi: 10.1177/2055102919840614. eCollection 2019 Jan-Jun. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6498783/  (Full article)

Graded exercise therapy for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome is not effective and unsafe. Re-analysis of a Cochrane review

Abstract:

The analysis of the 2017 Cochrane review reveals flaws, which means that contrary to its findings, there is no evidence that graded exercise therapy is effective. Because of the failure to report harms adequately in the trials covered by the review, it cannot be said that graded exercise therapy is safe. The analysis of the objective outcomes in the trials provides sufficient evidence to conclude that graded exercise therapy is an ineffective treatment for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome.

Source: Vink M, Vink-Niese A. Graded exercise therapy for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome is not effective and unsafe. Re-analysis of a Cochrane review. Health Psychol Open. 2018 Oct 8;5(2):2055102918805187. doi: 10.1177/2055102918805187. eCollection 2018 Jul-Dec.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30305916

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment is not effective for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome: A review of the FatiGo trial

Abstract:

The FatiGo trial concluded that multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment is more effective for chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis in the long term than cognitive behaviour therapy and that multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment is more cost-effective for fatigue and cognitive behaviour therapy for quality of life. However, FatiGo suffered from a number of serious methodological flaws. Moreover, it ignored the results of the activity metre, its only objective outcome. This jeopardizes the validity of FatiGo. Its analysis shows that there was no statistically significant difference between multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment and cognitive behaviour therapy and neither are (cost-)effective. FatiGo’s claims of efficacy of multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment and cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis are misleading and not justified by their results.

Source: Mark Vink and Alexandra Vink-Niese. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment is not effective for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome: A review of the FatiGo trial. Health Psychology Open. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2055102918792648 (Full article)

PACE trial authors continue to ignore their own null effect

Abstract:

Protocols and outcomes for the PACE trial were changed after the start of the trial. These changes made substantial differences, leading to exaggerated claims for the efficacy of cognitive behavior therapy and graded exercise therapy in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome. The small, self-reported improvements in subjective measures cannot be used to say the interventions are effective, particularly in light of the absence of objective improvement. Geraghty’s criticism of the trial was reasonable and supported by the evidence.

Source: Vink M. PACE trial authors continue to ignore their own null effect. J Health Psychol. 2017 Aug;22(9):1134-1140. doi: 10.1177/1359105317703785. Epub 2017 Apr 27. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28805519