Search

Objective: To examine individual outcomes after tailored lifestyle (PROfeel) or generic dietary advice as self‐management intervention for persistent fatigue in adolescents and young adults with a chronic condition, to compare participants who did and did not benefit and to explore changes to factors in the biopsychosocial model of fatigue after PROfeel. Method: A multiple single‐case AB‐phase design was embedded in a randomized crossover trial (N = 45). Intensive longitudinal data (ILD) on outcomes 'fatigue severity', 'self‐efficacy' and 'quality of life' (QoL) were collected through weekly smartphone measurement for 20 weeks. ILD on biopsychosocial factors were collected through experience sampling methodology for 28 days pre‐post first intervention. Baseline characteristics were compared with t‐tests and chi‐square tests. Permutation distancing tests were used to assess change over time in all ILD. Results: Regarding weekly measurements, nineteen participants (42.22%) showed small to large positive outcomes (drange =.05 to 2.59), mostly after PROfeel. Eleven participants (24.44%) showed small to moderate negative outcomes (drange = −.02 to −2.46), mostly after dietary advice. Fatigue severity improved most, followed by self‐efficacy. Participants who benefitted showed higher QoL levels and lower fatigue and pain levels compared with others at baseline (all p <.02). When positive outcomes were observed after PROfeel, typically ≥1 biopsychosocial factor had been targeted successfully. Conclusion: Self‐management advice has more potential when tailored to individual characteristics, including the biopsychosocial model of fatigue. PROfeel appears particularly useful as fatigue intervention for individuals with relatively less severe symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate the use of two self‐management intervention strategies for persistent fatigue in adolescents and young adults with a fatigue syndrome or rheumatic condition. Design: A randomized crossover trial administering tailored lifestyle advice and generic dietary advice, each 12 weeks, with a four‐week washout period between. Methods: Sixty participants (aged 12–29) were included. Tailoring was achieved through the PROfeel method. Dietary guidelines were conceptualized by the Netherlands Nutrition Centre. Questionnaires were used pre–post‐interventions to measure primary outcome 'fatigue severity' (Checklist Individual Strength‐8) and secondary outcomes 'self‐efficacy' (Self‐Efficacy Scale‐28) and 'quality of life' (QoL) (Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0). Feasibility and adherence were self‐rated on a scale of 1 to 10 (low to high). Linear mixed modelling was used to assess change over time, compare strategy effectiveness and study the impact of intervention order. Results: Fatigue severity, self‐efficacy and QoL regarding 'physical' and 'emotional' functioning improved significantly over time (all p <.015). The average improvement of the two QoL subscales was clinically relevant, as was the fatigue improvement in 20 out of 46 participants who completed the trial and 5 dropouts. The interventions were equally effective, and intervention order did not impact the improvement level (prange =.242–.984). The self‐management strategies received similar feasibility (M = 6.45, SD = 1.91) and adherence (M = 7.67, SD = 1.67) ratings. Conclusions: As small to clinically relevant improvements were observed, self‐management strategies might be particularly useful to bridge waiting time for guided treatments such as Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]