Search

Background: Meta-analyses have been inconclusive about the efficacy of cognitive behaviour therapies (CBTs) delivered in groups of patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) due to a lack of adequate studies. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic randomised controlled trial with 204 adult CFS patients from our routine clinical practice who were willing to receive group therapy. Patients were equally allocated to therapy groups of 8 patients and 2 therapists, 4 patients and 1 therapist or a waiting list control condition. Primary analysis was based on the intention-to-treat principle and compared the intervention group (n = 136) with the waiting list condition (n = 68). The study was open label. Results: Thirty-four (17%) patients were lost to follow-up during the course of the trial. Missing data were imputed using mean proportions of improvement based on the outcome scores of similar patients with a second assessment. Large and significant improvement in favour of the intervention group was found on fatigue severity (effect size = 1.1) and overall impairment (effect size = 0.9) at the second assessment. Physical functioning and psychological distress improved moderately (effect size = 0.5). Treatment effects remained significant in sensitivity and per-protocol analyses. Subgroup analysis revealed that the effects of the intervention also remained significant when both group sizes (i.e. 4 and 8 patients) were compared separately with the waiting list condition. Conclusions: CBT can be effectively delivered in groups of CFS patients. Group size does not seem to affect the general efficacy of the intervention which is of importance for settings in which large treatment groups are not feasible due to limited referral.

Contains fulltext : 89723.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) can decrease the level of fatigue and disabilities, but it has been suggested that during therapy some patients experience a deterioration of their symptoms rather than an improvement. The aim of this study is to examine the frequency and severity of symptom deterioration during CBT for CFS. METHODS: Data from 3 randomised controlled trials on CBT for CFS were pooled and reanalysed. Symptom deterioration during the trial was rated by patients and measured as deterioration in fatigue, pain, functional impairment and psychological distress. Both the frequency and severity of deterioration in these domains were compared between the patients receiving CBT and those in the control group. Predictors of symptom deterioration were identified by comparing their means in patients with and without an increase in fatigue. Statistically significant predictors were then combined in a logistic regression model. RESULTS: The frequency of symptom deterioration varied from 2 to 12% in patients receiving CBT and from 7 to 17% in the control group. None of the measures showed a significantly higher frequency of symptom deterioration in the CBT group. The severity of deterioration was also comparable in the CBT and in the control group. No predictors of symptom deterioration specific to CBT were found. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving CBT do not experience more frequent or more severe symptom deterioration than untreated patients. The reported deterioration during CBT seems to reflect the natural variation in symptoms. Thus, CBT is not only a helpful, but also a safe treatment for CFS. 01 juni 2010

Contains fulltext : 51742.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) leads to a decrease in symptoms and disabilities. There is controversy about the nature of the change following treatment; some suggest that patients improve by learning to adapt to a chronic condition, others think that recovery is possible. The objective of this study was to find out whether recovery from CFS is possible after CBT. METHODS: The outcome of a cohort of 96 patients treated for CFS with CBT was studied. The definition of recovery was based on the absence of the criteria for CFS set up by the Center for Disease Control (CDC), but also took into account the perception of the patients' fatigue and their own health. Data from healthy population norms were used in calculating conservative thresholds for recovery. RESULTS: After treatment, 69% of the patients no longer met the CDC criteria for CFS. The percentage of recovered patients depended on the criteria used for recovery. Using the most comprehensive definition of recovery, 23% of the patients fully recovered. Fewer patients with a co-morbid medical condition recovered. CONCLUSION: Significant improvement following CBT is probable and a full recovery is possible. Sharing this information with patients can raise the expectations of the treatment, which may enhance outcomes without raising false hopes.