Search

Abstract Fatigue is one of the common symptoms in individuals with diseases or disorders, significantly affecting quality of life (QoL) and the prognosis of diseases. This study aimed to comprehensively compare the features of fatigue across a wide range of diseases. We systematically searched the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases from inception to March 31st, 2021, and conducted a meta-analysis to generate precise estimates. The analyses were stratified by classification of diseases, gender, and severity of fatigue (moderate and severe), and study quality was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS). In total, 214 articles (233 prevalence data) met our eligibility criteria, covering 102,024 participants (mean 438 ± 1,421) across 88 diseases. Among these, seventy-eight data sets (52,082 participants) and thirty-nine data sets (10,389 participants) reported gender- and severity-related fatigue prevalence. The overall prevalence among subjects with 88 diseases was 49.4% [95% CI 46.9–52.1]. According to the International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) classification, the highest prevalence of fatigue (65.9% [95% CI 54.9–79.6]) was observed in patients with mental/behavioral diseases, whereas the lowest prevalence (34.7% [95% CI 24.5–49.2]) was found among those with circulatory system diseases. A slight female dominance (43.5% vs. 49.8%) was observed in the total data, with the most notable female predominance (1.8-fold) seen in patients with low back pain. The top disease groups with a moderate to severe level of fatigue included gastroparesis (92.3%), pulmonary hypertension (90.0%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, 83.2%), and multiple sclerosis (80.0%). These results are the first to comprehensively show the comparative features of fatigue prevalence among subjects across 88 diseases. Our findings provide valuable reference data for future research on fatigue and for the management of patients with fatigue. Prospero registration number: CRD42021270494

Abstract Background Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) is a debilitating illness medically unexplained, affecting approximately 1% of the global population. Due to the subjective complaint, assessing the exact severity of fatigue is a clinical challenge, thus, this study aimed to produce comprehensive features of fatigue severity in ME/CFS patients. Methods We systematically extracted the data for fatigue levels of participants in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) targeting ME/CFS from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL throughout January 31, 2024. We normalized each different measurement to a maximum 100-point scale and performed a meta-analysis to assess fatigue severity by subgroups of age, fatigue domain, intervention, case definition, and assessment tool, respectively. Results Among the total of 497 relevant studies, 60 RCTs finally met our eligibility criteria, which included a total of 7088 ME/CFS patients (males 1815, females 4532, and no information 741). The fatigue severity of the whole 7,088 patients was 77.9 (95% CI 74.7–81.0), showing 77.7 (95% CI 74.3–81.0) from 54 RCTs in 6,706 adults and 79.6 (95% CI 69.8–89.3) from 6 RCTs in 382 adolescents. Regarding the domain of fatigue, ‘cognitive’ (74.2, 95% CI 65.4–83.0) and ‘physical’ fatigue (74.3, 95% CI 68.3–80.3) were a little higher than ‘mental’ fatigue (70.1, 95% CI 64.4–75.8). The ME/CFS participants for non-pharmacological intervention (79.1, 95% CI 75.2–83.0) showed a higher fatigue level than those for pharmacological intervention (75.5, 95% CI 70.0–81.0). The fatigue levels of ME/CFS patients varied according to diagnostic criteria and assessment tools adapted in RCTs, likely from 54.2 by ICC (International Consensus Criteria) to 83.6 by Canadian criteria and 54.2 by MFS (Mental Fatigue Scale) to 88.6 by CIS (Checklist Individual Strength), respectively. Conclusions This systematic review firstly produced comprehensive features of fatigue severity in patients with ME/CFS. Our data will provide insights for clinicians in diagnosis, therapeutic assessment, and patient management, as well as for researchers in fatigue-related investigations.

Abstract Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) affects therapeutic compliance and clinical outcomes including recurrence and mortality. This study aimed to comprehensively and comparatively assess the severity-based prevalence of CRF. From two public databases (PubMed and Cochrane Library), we extracted data containing information on both prevalence and severity of fatigue in cancer patients through December 2021. We conducted a meta-analysis to produce point estimates using random effects models. Subgroup analyses were used to assess the prevalence and severity by the organ/system tumor development, treatment phase, therapeutic type, sex and assessment method. A total of 151 data (57 studies, 34,310 participants, 11,805 males and 22,505 females) were selected, which indicated 43.0% (95% CI 39.2–47.2) of fatigue prevalence. The total CRF prevalence including ‘mild’ level of fatigue was 70.7% (95% CI 60.6–83.3 from 37 data). The prevalence of ‘severe’ fatigue significantly varied by organ/system types of cancer origin (highest in brain tumors 39.7% vs. lowest in gynecologic tumors 3.9%) and treatment phase likely 15.9% (95% CI 8.1–31.3) before treatment, 33.8% (95% CI 27.7–41.2) ongoing treatment, and 24.1% (95% CI 18.6–31.2) after treatment. Chemotherapy (33.1%) induced approximately 1.5-fold higher prevalence for ‘severe’ CRF than surgery (22.0%) and radiotherapy (24.2%). The self-reported data for ‘severe’ CRF was 20-fold higher than those assessed by physicians (23.6% vs. 1.6%). Female patients exhibited a 1.4-fold higher prevalence of ‘severe’ fatigue compared to males. The present data showed quantitative feature of the prevalence and severity of CRF based on the cancer- or treatment-related factors, sex, and perspective of patient versus physician. In the context of the medical impact of CRF, our results provide a comparative reference to oncologists or health care providers making patient-specific decision.

Introduction: Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide, and most patients experience fatigue. However, there are no effective treatments for cancer-related fatigue (CRF). Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have suggested that moxibustion improves CRF. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the differences in fatigue scale scores, quality of life, and clinical efficacy in patients with breast cancer who developed CRF and did versus did not receive moxibustion. Methods: RCTs were searched in 7 databases using a standardized search method from database inception to March 2023, and RCTs that met the inclusion criteria were selected. Results: Among 1337 initially identified RCTs, 10 RCTs involving 744 participants were selected for this study. The meta-analysis involved assessment of the revised Piper Fatigue Scale scores, Cancer Fatigue Scale scores, Karnofsky Performance Scale scores, Athens Insomnia Scale scores, clinical efficacy, and Qi deficiency syndrome scale scores. Compared with the control, moxibustion was associated with significantly better Piper Fatigue Scale scores ( P

BackgroundFatigue is one of the most common subjective symptoms that impairs daily life and predict health-related events. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of fatigue in the global population.MethodsPubMed and the Cochrane Library were used to search for relevant articles from inception to December 31, 2021. Studies with prevalence data of fatigue in the general population were selected and reviewed by three authors independently and cross-checked. Regarding subgroups, adults (≥18 years), minors (