Tag: Wessely

Causal attributions for somatic sensations in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and their partners

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) often make somatic attributions for their illness which has been associated with poor outcome. A tendency to make somatic attributions in general may be a vulnerability factor for the development of CFS.

METHODS: This cross-sectional study based on self-report questionnaire data aimed to investigate the type of attributions for symptoms made by patients with CFS and to compare this to attributions made by their partners. It was hypothesized that patients with CFS would make more somatic attributions for their own symptoms than control subjects and that partners of patients with CFS would make more somatic attributions for their ill relative’s symptoms but would be similar to controls regarding their own symptoms. Fifty patients with CFS were compared to 50 controls from a fracture clinic in the same hospital and 46 relatives living with the patients with CFS. A modified Symptom Interpretation Questionnaire was used to assess causal attributions.

RESULTS: CFS patients were more likely to make somatic attributions for their symptoms. The relatives of patients with CFS made significantly more somatic attributions for symptoms in their ill relative. However, they were like the fracture clinic controls in terms of making predominantly normalizing attributions for their own symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS: The data support modification of existing cognitive behavioural treatments for CFS to investigate whether addressing partners’ attributions for patients’ symptoms improves recovery in the patient. Furthermore, a tendency to make somatic attributions for symptoms may be a vulnerability factor for the development of CFS.

 

Source: Butler JA, Chalder T, Wessely S. Causal attributions for somatic sensations in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and their partners. Psychol Med. 2001 Jan;31(1):97-105. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11200964

 

Diagnosis of psychiatric disorder in clinical evaluation of chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

The overlap of symptoms in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and psychiatric disorders such as depression can complicate diagnosis. Patients often complain that they are wrongly given a psychiatric label. We compared psychiatric diagnoses made by general practitioners and hospital doctors with diagnoses established according to research diagnostic criteria.

68 CFS patients referred to a hospital fatigue clinic were assessed, and psychiatric diagnoses were established by use of a standardized interview schedule designed to provide current and lifetime diagnoses. These were compared with psychiatric diagnoses previously given to patients. Of the 31 patients who had previously received a psychiatric diagnosis 21 (68%) had been misdiagnosed: in most cases there was no evidence of any past or current psychiatric disorder. Of the 37 patients who had not previously received a psychiatric diagnosis 13 (35%) had a treatable psychiatric disorder in addition to CFS.

These findings highlight the difficulties of routine clinical evaluation of psychiatric disorder in CFS patients. We advise doctors to focus on subtle features that discriminate between disorders and to use a brief screening instrument such as the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.

 

Source: Deale A, Wessely S. Diagnosis of psychiatric disorder in clinical evaluation of chronic fatigue syndrome. J R Soc Med. 2000 Jun;93(6):310-2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1298034/ (Full article)

 

Chronic fatigue syndrome

Definition: Chronic fatigue syndrome is characterised by severe, disabling fatigue and other symptoms, including musculoskeletal pain, sleep disturbance, impaired concentration, and headaches. Two widely used definitions of chronic fatigue syndrome (from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 1 and from Oxford 2—see table) were developed as operational criteria for research. There are two important differences between these definitions. The British criteria insist on the presence of mental fatigue; the American criteria include a requirement for several physical symptoms, reflecting the belief that chronic fatigue syndrome has an underlying immunological or infective pathology.

Incidence/prevalence: Community and primary care based studies have reported the prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome to be 0.2-2.6%, depending on the criteria used.3 4 Systematic population surveys have found similar rates of the syndrome in people of different socioeconomic status, and in all ethnic groups.4 5 Female sex is the only demographic risk factor (relative risk 1.3 to 1.7 depending on diagnostic criteria used).6

Aetiology: The cause of chronic fatigue syndrome is poorly understood.

Prognosis: Studies of prognosis in chronic fatigue syndrome have focused on people attending specialist clinics, who are likely to have had the condition for longer and to have a poorer outlook. Children with the syndrome seem to have a notably better outcome: 54-94% of children show definite improvement (after up to six years’ follow up); 20-50% of adults show some improvement in the medium term and only 6% return to premorbid levels of functioning.7 Despite the considerable burden of morbidity associated with chronic fatigue syndrome, there is no evidence of increased mortality. Outcome is influenced by the presence of psychiatric disorders and beliefs about causation and treatment.7

Aims: To reduce levels of fatigue and associated symptoms; to increase levels of activity; to improve quality of life.

Outcomes: Severity of symptoms; effects on physical function and quality of life measured in several different ways by: the medical outcomes survey short form general health survey (SF-36), a rating scale measuring limitation of physical functioning caused by ill health 8; the Karnofsky scale, a modified questionnaire originally developed for the rating of quality of life in people undergoing chemotherapy for malignancy 9; the Beck depression inventory 10; the sickness impact profile, a measure of the influence of symptoms on social and physical functioning 11; and self reported severity of symptoms and levels of activity.

You can read the rest of this article here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1117488/

 

Source: Reid S, Chalder T, Cleare A, Hotopf M, Wessely S. Chronic fatigue syndrome. BMJ : British Medical Journal. 2000;320(7230):292-296. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1117488/ (Full article)

 

Personality and social attitudes in chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

One hundred one chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) patients attending a specialist CFS clinic were compared with 45 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients on a range of standardized questionnaire measures, to investigate whether CFS patients are characterized by particular personality traits or social attitudes.

No differences were found between CFS and RA patients in measures of perfectionism, attitudes toward mental illness, defensiveness, social desirability, or sensitivity to punishment (a concept related to neuroticism), on either crude or adjusted analyses. Alexithymia scores were greater in the RA patient group (p<0.05). Social adjustment, based on subjective assessment of overall restriction in activities and relationship difficulties, was substantially poorer in the CFS group (p<0.001). This was highly associated with depressive symptoms, but remained significant even after adjusting for depressive symptomatology.

There was no evidence from this study of major differences between the personalities of CFS patients and RA patients. The stereotype of CFS sufferers as perfectionists with negative attitudes toward psychiatry was not supported.

 

Source: Wood B, Wessely S. Personality and social attitudes in chronic fatigue syndrome. J Psychosom Res. 1999 Oct;47(4):385-97. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10616232

 

Case of chronic fatigue syndrome after Crimean war and Indian mutiny

Chronic fatigue syndrome was first proposed as a diagnostic label in 1988 to classify a disorder characterised by severe fatigue and exhaustion after minimal physical and mental effort accompanied by other unexplained somatic symptoms.1 It was introduced partly as an acceptable clinical alternative to the term myalgic encephalomyelitis, which described a similar presentation and had been coined in 1956 in the aftermath of an outbreak of illness among the nursing and medical staff of the Royal Free Hospital.2 The condition was widely assumed to be a new addition to the medical scene. In the popular press, and occasionally in the professional publications, attempts have been made to explain chronic fatigue syndrome as a product of the unwelcome features of modern life, such as pollution, stress, working practices, and new infections.

You can read the full article here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1127098/

 

Source: Jones E, Wessely S. Case of chronic fatigue syndrome after Crimean war and Indian mutiny. BMJ. 1999 Dec 18-25;319(7225):1645-7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1127098/ (Full article)

Prolonged fatigue, anxiety and depression: exploring relationships in a primary care sample

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: While prolonged fatigue states are frequently comorbid with other forms of distress, they are now the subject of independent aetiological and treatment research. The objective of this study was to use principal component analysis to clarify the relationships between proposed measures of prolonged fatigue and anxiety and depression in data obtained from patients attending primary care.

METHOD: Self-report measures of prolonged fatigue and psychological distress (anxiety and depression) were administered to consecutive ambulatory care patients attending primary care.

RESULTS: Data from 1593 subjects were obtained. A two-factor principal component solution (varimax rotation) demonstrated a clear separation between fatigue-related items (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.81) as compared with those items describing anxiety and/or depression (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.95). A four-factor solution produced similar results with two factors describing general psychological distress (contrasting anxiety and depression), with two other factors describing the profiles of mental and physical fatigue.

CONCLUSIONS: The results lend weight to the argument that prolonged fatigue states can be measured independently of conventional notions of anxiety and depression in patients attending primary care. Epidemiological, aetiological and treatment research in psychiatry may need to focus greater attention on such prolonged fatigue states.

Comment in: Response to: ‘Prolonged fatigue, anxiety and depression: exploring relationships in a primary care sample‘. [Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2000]

 

Source: Koschera A, Hickie I, Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Wilson A, Lloyd A. Prolonged fatigue, anxiety and depression: exploring relationships in a primary care sample. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 1999 Aug;33(4):545-52. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10483850

 

Fatigue and psychiatric disorder: different or the same?

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Fatigue and psychiatric symptoms are common in the community, but their association and outcome are sparsely studied.

METHOD: A total of 1177 patients were recruited from UK primary care on attending their general practitioner. Fatigue and psychiatric disorder was measured at three time points with the 12-item General Health Questionnaire and the 11-item Fatigue Questionnaire.

RESULTS: Total scores for fatigue and psychiatric disorder did not differ between the three time points and were closely correlated (r around 0.6). The association between non-co-morbid (‘pure’) fatigue and developing psychiatric disorder 6 months later was the same as that for being well and subsequent psychiatric disorder. Similarly, having non-co-morbid psychiatric disorder did not predict having fatigue any more than being well 6 months previously. Between 13 and 15% suffered from non-co-morbid fatigue at each time point and 2.5% suffered from fatigue at two time points 6 months apart. Less than 1% of patients suffered from non-co-morbid fatigue at all three time points.

CONCLUSIONS: The data are consistent with the existence of ‘pure’ independent fatigue state. However, this state is unstable and the majority (about three-quarters) of patients become well or a case of psychiatric disorder over 6 months. A persistent, independent fatigue state lasting for 6 months can be identified in the primary-care setting, but it is uncommon of the order of 2.5%. Non-co-morbid (pure) fatigue did not predict subsequent psychiatric disorder.

 

Source: van der Linden G, Chalder T, Hickie I, Koschera A, Sham P, Wessely S. Fatigue and psychiatric disorder: different or the same? Psychol Med. 1999 Jul;29(4):863-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10473313

 

Vitamin B status in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

Some patients with chronic fatigue syndrome say they benefit from taking vitamin supplements. We assessed functional status for the B vitamins pyridoxine, riboflavin and thiamine in 12 vitamin-untreated CFS patients and in 18 healthy controls matched for age and sex.

Vitamin-dependent activities–aspartate aminotransferase (AST) for pyridoxine, glutathione reductase (GTR) for riboflavin, transketolase (TK) for thiamine–were measured in erythrocyte haemolysates before and after in-vitro addition of the relevant vitamin. For all three enzymes basal activity (U/g Hb) was lower in CFS patients than in controls: AST 2.84 (SD 0.62) vs 4.61 (1.43), P < 0.001; GTR 6.13 (1.89) vs 7.42 (1.25), P < 0.04; TK 0.50 (0.13) vs 0.60 (0.07), P < 0.04. This was also true of activated values: AST 4.91 (0.54) vs 7.89 (2.11), P < 0.001; GTR 8.29 (1.60) vs 10.0 (1.80), P < 0.001; TK 0.56 (0.19) vs 0.66 (0.08), P < 0.07. The activation ratios, however, did not differ between the groups.

These data provide preliminary evidence of reduced functional B vitamin status, particularly of pyridoxine, in CFS patients.

 

Source: Heap LC, Peters TJ, Wessely S. Vitamin B status in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. J R Soc Med. 1999 Apr;92(4):183-5. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1297139/ (Full article)

 

Low-dose hydrocortisone in chronic fatigue syndrome: a randomised crossover trial

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Reports of mild hypocortisolism in chronic fatigue syndrome led us to postulate that low-dose hydrocortisone therapy may be an effective treatment.

METHODS: In a randomised crossover trial, we screened 218 patients with chronic fatigue. 32 patients met our strict criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome without co-morbid psychiatric disorder. The eligible patients received consecutive treatment with low-dose hydrocortisone (5 mg or 10 mg daily) for 1 month and placebo for 1 month; the order of treatment was randomly assigned. Analysis was by intention to treat.

FINDINGS: None of the patients dropped out. Compared with the baseline self-reported fatigue scores (mean 25.1 points), the score fell by 7.2 points for patients on hydrocortisone and by 3.3 points for those on placebo (paired difference in mean scores 4.5 points [95% CI 1.2-7.7], p=0.009). In nine (28%) of the 32 patients on hydrocortisone, fatigue scores reached a predefined cut-off value similar to the normal population score, compared with three (9%) of the 32 on placebo (Fisher’s exact test p=0.05). The degree of disability was reduced with hydrocortisone treatment, but not with placebo. Insulin stress tests showed that endogenous adrenal function was not suppressed by hydrocortisone. Minor side-effects were reported by three patients after hydrocortisone treatment and by one patient after placebo.

INTERPRETATION: In some patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, low-dose hydrocortisone reduces fatigue levels in the short term. Treatment for a longer time and follow-up studies are needed to find out whether this effect could be clinically useful.

Comment in:

Hydrocortisone and chronic fatigue syndrome. [Lancet. 1999]

Hydrocortisone and chronic fatigue syndrome. [Lancet. 1999]

Chronic fatigue syndrome and functional hypoadrenia–fighting vainly the old ennui. [Lancet. 1999]

Hydrocortisone and chronic fatigue syndrome. [Lancet. 1999]

Hydrocortisone and chronic fatigue syndrome. [Lancet. 1999]

 

Source: Cleare AJ, Heap E, Malhi GS, Wessely S, O’Keane V, Miell J. Low-dose hydrocortisone in chronic fatigue syndrome: a randomised crossover trial. Lancet. 1999 Feb 6;353(9151):455-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9989716

 

Illness beliefs and treatment outcome in chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

Longitudinal studies have shown that physical illness attributions are associated with poor prognosis in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Speculation exists over whether such attributions influence treatment outcome. This study reports the effect of illness beliefs on outcome in a randomized controlled trial of cognitive-behavior therapy versus relaxation.

Causal attributions and beliefs about exercise, activity, and rest were recorded before and after treatment in 60 CFS patients recruited to the trial. Physical illness attributions were widespread, did not change with treatment, and were not associated with poor outcome in either the cognitive-behavior therapy group or the control group.

Beliefs about avoidance of exercise and activity changed in the cognitive behavior therapy group, but not in the control group. This change was associated with improved outcome. These findings suggest that physical illness attributions are less important in determining outcome (at least in treatment studies) than has been previously thought. In this study, good outcome is associated with change in avoidance behavior, and related beliefs, rather than causal attributions.

 

Source: Deale A, Chalder T, Wessely S. Illness beliefs and treatment outcome in chronic fatigue syndrome. J Psychosom Res. 1998 Jul;45(1):77-83. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9720857