Focus on post-exertional malaise when approaching ME/CFS in specialist healthcare improves satisfaction and reduces deterioration

Background

Post-exertional malaise (PEM) is considered a hallmark characteristic of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). This may also apply to subgroups of patients with long COVID-induced ME/CFS. However, it is uncertain to what extent PEM is acknowledged in routine specialist healthcare for ME/CFS patients, and how this affects patient outcomes.

Objective

This study aims to evaluate to what extent ME/CFS patients experienced focus on PEM in specialist healthcare practice and its significance for outcome and care quality.

Methods

Data from two online cross-sectional surveys covering specialist healthcare services for ME/CFS patients at rehabilitation institutes in Norway and two regional hospitals, respectively, were analyzed. Evaluations of 788 rehabilitation stays, 86 hospital consultations, and 89 hospital interventions were included. Logistic regression models and Mann-Whitney U-tests were used to quantify the impact of addressing PEM on health and functioning, care satisfaction, or benefit. Spearman's rank correlation and Cronbach's alpha of focus on PEM with the respondents' perception of healthcare providers' knowledge, symptom acknowledgment, and suitability of intervention were assessed as measures for care quality and their internal consistency, respectively.

Results

PEM was addressed in 48% of the rehabilitation stays, 43% of the consultations, and 65% of the hospital interventions. Failure to address PEM roughly doubled the risk of health deterioration, following rehabilitation (OR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.29-0.52; 40.1% vs. 63.2% P = <0.001) and hospital intervention (OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.13-0.89; 22.4% vs. 45.2%, p = 0.026). The focus on PEM (PEM-focus) during the clinical contact was associated with significantly higher scores on patients' rated care satisfaction and benefit of both consultation and intervention. Furthermore, addressing PEM was (inter)related to positive views about healthcare providers' level of knowledge of ME/CFS, their acknowledgment of symptoms, obtained knowledge, and the perceived suitability of intervention (Cronbach's alpha ≥0.80).

Discussion

PEM is still frequently not acknowledged in specialist healthcare practice for ME/CFS patients in Norway. Not addressing PEM substantially increased the probability of a decline in health and functioning following the intervention and was strongly associated with reduced perceived care quality, satisfaction, and benefit. These findings may be related to the applied explanatory models for ME/CFS and are most likely of relevance to long COVID.

Onset Patterns and Course of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Background: Epidemiologic studies of myalgic encephalomyelitis/ chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) have examined different aspects of this disease separately but few have explored them together. Objective: Describe ME/CFS onset and course in one United States-based cohort. Methods: One hundred and fifty subjects fitting Fukuda 1994 CFS criteria completed a detailed survey concerning the initial and subsequent stages of their illness. Descriptive statistics, graphs, and tables were used to illustrate prevalence and patterns of characteristics. Results: The most common peri-onset events reported by subjects were infection-related episodes (64%), stressful incidents (39%), and exposure to environmental toxins (20%). For 38% of subjects, more than 6 months elapsed from experiencing any initial symptom to developing the set of symptoms comprising their ME/CFS. Over time, the 12 most common symptoms persisted but declined in prevalence, with fatigue, unrefreshing sleep, exertion-related sickness, and flu-like symptoms declining the most (by 20-25%). Conversely, cognitive symptoms changed the least in prevalence, rising in symptom ranking. Pregnancy, menopause, and menstrual cycles exacerbated many women's symptoms. Fatigue-related function was not associated with duration of illness or age; during the worst periods of their illness, 48% of subjects could not engage in any productive activity. At the time of survey, 47% were unable to work and only 4% felt their condition was improving steadily with the majority (59%) describing a fluctuating course. Ninety-seven percent suffered from at least one other illness: anxiety (48%), depression (43%), fibromyalgia (39%), irritable bowel syndrome (38%), and migraine headaches (37%) were the most diagnosed conditions. Thirteen percent came from families where at least one other first-degree relative was also afflicted, rising to 27% when chronic fatigue of unclear etiology was included. Conclusions: This paper offers a broad epidemiologic overview of one ME/CFS cohort in the United States. While most of our findings are consistent with prior studies, we highlight underexamined aspects of this condition (e.g., the evolution of symptoms) and propose new interpretations of findings. Studying these aspects can offer insight and solutions to the diagnosis, etiology, pathophysiology, and treatment of this condition.

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) or What? An Operational Definition

Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), identified as a new clinical entity with distinctive features in 1956, was originally considered as a neuromuscular disease. In 1988 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention introduced the ill-defined concept of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). As predicted, CFS, unjustly considered to be a synonym for ME, pushed ME to the background. To develop effective therapies for of ME and CFS, it is essential to investigate patients with ME specifically. For that reason, an operational definition of ME is indispensable. This article proposes an operational definition based on the most recent formal definitions and symptoms observed in ME. ME is a multi-systemic illness, which (1) often has a sudden onset, in most cases a respiratory and/or gastro-intestinal infection, but a gradual or more dramatic onset is also possible; (2) has an epidemic and an endemic form; (3) has an unique clinical pattern deviating from other post-viral states; (4) is distinguished by muscle fatigability/prolonged muscle weakness after trivial exertion; (5) is accompanied by symptoms relating to neurological disturbance, especially of cognitive, autonomic, and sensory functions; (6) can be accompanied by symptoms associated with cardiac and other systems; (7) is characterized by fluctuation of symptoms (within and between "episodes"); (8) has a prolonged relapsing course; and (9) has a tendency to become chronic. In conclusion, a discriminative definition for ME contains four mandatory elements: (1) muscle fatigability/post-exertional muscle weakness lasting for days; (2) operational criteria for "neurological disturbance, especially of cognitive, autonomic and sensory functions"; (3) fluctuation of symptoms; and (4) a prolonged relapsing course. This tentative definition of ME justifies the qualification "neuromuscular disease".

A reexamination of the cognitive behavioral model of chronic fatigue syndrome

OBJECTIVE

The cognitive behavioral model of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) suggests that cognitions and reduced activity level perpetuate the fatigue and impairment that individuals with CFS experience. The two empirical evaluations of this model resulted in conflicting findings. The current study examines the influence of case definition fulfillment on the applicability of this model to CFS.

METHOD

A moderated mediation analysis was conducted on 990 individuals with CFS to reexamine the behavioral pathway of this model. Case definition fulfillment was entered as a moderator.

RESULTS

Findings were generally inconsistent with the cognitive behavioral model of CFS. Case definition fulfillment significantly moderated the relation between activity level and physical impairment (β = -0.08, p = 0.03); individuals who met more stringent case definitions demonstrated a weaker relation between activity level and impairment.

CONCLUSIONS

This model may not accurately represent the experience of individuals with CFS, particularly those who fulfill more stringent case definitions.

A Comparison of Case Definitions for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Many professionals have described the clinical presentation of myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), but recent efforts have focused on the development of ME criteria that can be reliably applied. The current study compared the symptoms and functioning of individuals who met the newly-developed Institute of Medicine (IOM) clinical criteria to a revised version of the London criteria for ME. While 76% of a sample diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) met the IOM criteria, 44% met the revised London criteria. The revised London criteria identified patients with greater physical impairment. The results of this study indicate the need for a standard case definition with specific guidelines for operationalization. The application of case definitions has important implications for the number of individuals identified with ME, the pattern of symptoms experienced by these individuals, and the severity of their symptoms and functional limitations. Sample heterogeneity across research studies hinders researchers from replicating findings and impedes the search for biological markers and effective treatments.

Case definitions integrating empiric and consensus perspectives

BACKGROUND

There has been considerable controversy regarding how to name and define the illnesses known as myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). The IOM report has proposed a new clinical criteria and name for this illness, but aspects of these recommendations have been scrutinized by patients and scientists.

PURPOSE

It is possible that both empiric and consensus approaches could be used to help settle some of these diagnostic challenges. Using patient samples collected in the United States, Great Britain, and Norway (N=556), the current study attempted to categorize patients using more general as well as more restricted case definitions.

RESULTS

Overall, the outcomes suggest that there might be four groupings of patients, with the broadest category involving those with chronic fatigue (N=62), defined by 6 or more months of fatigue which can be cannot be explained by medical or psychiatric conditions. A second category involves those patients that have chronic fatigue that can be explained by a medical or psychiatric condition (N=47). A third category involves more specific criteria that have been posited both by the IOM report, a Canadian Clinical Case criteria, a ME-ICC criteria and a more empiric approach. These efforts have specified domains of substantial reductions of activity, post-exertional malaise, neurocognitive impairment, and sleep dysfunction (N=346). Patients with these characteristics were more functionally impaired than those meeting just chronic fatigue criteria, p < .05. Finally, those meeting even more restrictive ME criteria proposed by Ramsay, identified a smaller and even more impaired group, p < .05.

DISCUSSION

The advantages of using such empirical and consensus approaches to develop reliable classification and diagnostic efforts are discussed.

Complications in operationalizing lifelong fatigue as an exclusionary criterion

The case definitions for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and chronic fatigue syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) stipulate that the experience of lifelong fatigue is an exclusionary criterion (Carruthers et al., 2003 ; Fukuda et al., 1994 ). This article examines the lifelong fatigue construct and identifies potential validity and reliability issues in using lifelong fatigue as an exclusionary condition. Participants in the current study completed the DePaul Symptom Questionnaire (Jason et al., 2010 ), and responses were examined to determine if they had experienced lifelong fatigue. This article discusses the extensive process that was needed to confidently discern which participants had or did not have lifelong fatigue. Using the most rigorous standards, few individuals were classified as having lifelong fatigue. In addition, those with and without lifelong fatigue had few significant differences in symptoms and functional areas. This article concludes with a recommendation that lifelong fatigue should no longer be used as an exclusionary criterion for CFS or ME/CFS.

Problems in defining post-exertional malaise

Post-exertional malaise (PEM) is a cardinal symptom of the illnesses referred to as Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME), Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). PEM is reported to occur in many of these patients, and with several criteria (e.g., ME and ME/CFS), this symptom is mandatory (Carruthers et al., 2003 , 2011 ). In the present study, 32 participants diagnosed with CFS (Fukuda et al., 1994 ) were examined on their responses to self-report items that were developed to capture the characteristics and patterns of PEM. As shown in the results, the slight differences in wording for various items may affect whether one is determined to have PEM according to currently used self-report criteria to assess CFS. Better understanding of how this symptom is assessed might help improve the diagnostic reliability and validity of ME, ME/CFS, and CFS.

Defining Essential Features of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Considerable debate surrounds the search for the defining features of patients with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Current case definitions were created through clinical consensus. Failure to operationalize these case definitions has led to considerable variability in the identification of patients. In addition, some case definitions (e.g., Fukuda et al., 1994) do not require cardinal symptoms of this illness, where as other case definitions do require core symptoms of this illness (Carruthers et al., 2003, 2011), and these latter case criteria appear to identify a more impaired group of patients. Criterion variance is most likely to occur when operationally explicit criteria do not exist for diagnostic categories (Spitzer, Endicott, & Robins, 1978), or when there are varying criteria for contrasting case definitions, which is an impediment to the research in this field. To deal with this problem, it is possible to differentiate those that meet more loosely defined criteria from those that are more narrowly and defined, thus differentiating CFS from ME. In order to progress the search for biological markers and effective treatments, essential features need to be operationalized and broadly used in order to increase the probability that individuals included in samples have the same underlying illness.

Chronic fatigue syndrome versus sudden onset myalgic encephalomyelitis

A revised sudden onset case definition for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) has been developed (Jason, Damrongvachiraphan, et al., 2012 ) based on past case definitions. In a prior study, Jason, Brown, and colleagues ( 2012 ) compared patients recruited using the 1994 case definition of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) to contrast those meeting criteria for the revised ME criteria. They found that this revised ME case definition identified patients with more functional impairments and physical, mental, and cognitive problems than those meeting the CFS criteria. The study by Jason, Brown, et al. ( 2012 ) only selected individuals who first met the CFS criteria, and it only relied on one Chicago-based data set. The current study replicated this comparison with two distinct data sets with different case ascertainment methods. Results indicate that the ME criteria identified a group of patients with more functional disabilities as well as more severe post-exertional malaise symptoms.

What is in a name? Comparing diagnostic criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome with or without fibromyalgia

The current study had two objectives. (1) to compare objective and self-report measures in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) according to the 1994 Center for Disease Control (CDC) criteria, patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), and healthy controls, and (2) to contrast CFS patients who only fulfill CDC criteria to those who also fulfill the criteria for myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), the 2003 Canadian criteria for ME/CFS, or the comorbid diagnosis of fibromyalgia (FM). One hundred six participants (48 CFS patients diagnosed following the 1994 CDC criteria, 19 MS patients, and 39 healthy controls) completed questionnaires assessing symptom severity, quality of life, daily functioning, and psychological factors. Objective measures consisted of activity monitoring, evaluation of maximal voluntary contraction and muscle recovery, and cognitive performance. CFS patients were screened whether they also fulfilled ME criteria, the Canadian criteria, and the diagnosis of FM. CFS patients scored higher on symptom severity, lower on quality of life, and higher on depression and kinesiophobia and worse on MVC, muscle recovery, and cognitive performance compared to the MS patients and the healthy subjects. Daily activity levels were also lower compared to healthy subjects. Only one difference was found between those fulfilling the ME criteria and those who did not regarding the degree of kinesiophobia (lower in ME), while comorbidity for FM significantly increased the symptom burden. CFS patients report more severe symptoms and are more disabled compared to MS patients and healthy controls. Based on the present study, fulfillment of the ME or Canadian criteria did not seem to give a clinically different picture, whereas a diagnosis of comorbid FM selected symptomatically worse and more disabled patients.

Validating a measure of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome symptomatology

OBJECTIVES

The present study sought to validate a comprehensive self-report measure of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) symptomatology to aid in clinical and research assessment.

METHOD

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to establish the underlying factor structure of the DePaul Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) (Jason, Evans, et al., 2010) using a well-characterized sample of individuals (92.6% met the Fukuda et al. criteria (1994) and/or the Clinical Canadian Criteria (Carruthers et al., 2003)), and this structure was then tested on a less stringently recruited sample of individuals utilizing a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Convergent and discriminant validity of the DSQ were also examined utilizing alternative measures of symptomatology and functioning.

RESULTS

A 3-factor solution was found using EFA (Neuroendocrine, Autonomic & Immune Dysfunction; Neurological/Cognitive Dysfunction; Post-Exertional Malaise) and the fit of this factor structure was adequate for the second sample.

DISCUSSION

The DSQ is a valid measure of ME/CFS symptomatology. The emergent factors were consistent with previous literature on symptom clusters, and convergent and discriminant validity were established.

Examining case definition criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome and myalgic encephalomyelitis

BACKGROUND

Considerable controversy has transpired regarding the core features of myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Current case definitions differ in the number and types of symptoms required. This ambiguity impedes the search for biological markers and effective treatments.

PURPOSE

This study sought to empirically operationalize symptom criteria and identify which symptoms best characterize the illness.

METHODS

Patients (n=236) and controls (n=86) completed the DePaul Symptom Questionnaire, rating the frequency and severity of 54 symptoms. Responses were compared to determine the threshold of frequency/severity ratings that best distinguished patients from controls. A Classification and Regression Tree (CART) algorithm was used to identify the combination of symptoms that most accurately classified patients and controls.

RESULTS

A third of controls met the symptom criteria of a common CFS case definition when just symptom presence was required; however, when frequency/severity requirements were raised, only 5% met criteria. Employing these higher frequency/severity requirements, the CART algorithm identified three symptoms that accurately classified 95.4% of participants as patient or control: fatigue/extreme tiredness, inability to focus on multiple things simultaneously, and experiencing a dead/heavy feeling after starting to exercise.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimum frequency/severity thresholds should be specified in symptom criteria to reduce the likelihood of misclassification. Future research should continue to seek empirical support of the core symptoms of ME and CFS to further progress the search for biological markers and treatments.

Paediatric chronic fatigue syndrome: complex presentations and protracted time to diagnosis

AIM

The diagnosis and management of paediatric chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) remain ongoing challenges for paediatric clinicians, particularly given its unknown aetiology and the little research on effective treatments for this condition. The aim of this study was to describe the presenting features of new patients attending a specialist chronic fatigue clinic at a tertiary-level Australian children's hospital.

METHOD

The medical records of all patients with an initial consultation at the chronic fatigue clinic over a 12-month period were reviewed using a standardised data collection template. Functional impact was based on school attendance and classified according to the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines (2007).

RESULTS

A total of 99 patients attending the clinic were identified. Of these, 59 were diagnosed with CFS. Median age was 15.4 years with almost two-thirds of patients of female sex. Median time between symptom onset and diagnosis was 15.5 months. There was a high occurrence of fatigue, sleep disturbance, pain, postexertional malaise, and autonomic and cognitive symptoms in the group. The functional impact of CFS was classified as mild for 20%, moderate for 66% and severe for 14% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Most young people diagnosed with CFS experience symptoms for a protracted period, with considerable functional impact prior to initial tertiary service consultation. This audit has identified important areas for research, practice development and education in relation to the management of patients with CFS.

Interventions in pediatric chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis: a systematic review

PURPOSE

A range of interventions have been used for the management of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) in children and adolescents. Currently, debate exists as to the effectiveness of these different management strategies. The objective of this review was to synthesize and critically appraise the literature on interventions for pediatric CFS/ME.

METHOD

CINAHL, PsycINFO and Medline databases were searched to retrieve relevant studies of intervention outcomes in children and/or adolescents diagnosed with CFS/ME. Two reviewers independently selected articles and appraised the quality on the basis of predefined criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 24 articles based on 21 studies met the inclusion criteria. Methodological design and quality were variable. The majority assessed behavioral interventions (10 multidisciplinary rehabilitation; 9 psychological interventions; 1 exercise intervention; 1 immunological intervention). There was marked heterogeneity in participant and intervention characteristics, and outcome measures used across studies. The strongest evidence was for Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)-based interventions, with weaker evidence for multidisciplinary rehabilitation. Limited information exists on the maintenance of intervention effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence for the effectiveness of interventions for children and adolescents with CFS/ME is still emerging. Methodological inadequacies and inconsistent approaches limit interpretation of findings. There is some evidence that children and adolescents with CFS/ME benefit from particular interventions; however, there remain gaps in the current evidence base.

Contrasting Chronic Fatigue Syndrome versus Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Much debate is transpiring regarding whether chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) are different illnesses. Several prior studies that compared the Fukuda et al. CFS criteria to the Canadian ME/CFS criteria found that the Canadian criteria identified patients with more functional impairments and greater physical, mental, and cognitive problems than those who met Fukuda et al. criteria.[3,4] These samples were located in the Chicago metropolitan area, so the results could not be generalized to other locations. In addition, past studies used a symptom questionnaire that was not specifically developed to tap the Canadian criteria.

PURPOSE

The present comparative study of CFS and ME/CFS criteria was intended to correct the methodological problems of prior studies.

METHODS

This article used data from three distinct samples to compare patients who met criteria for the ME/CFS Canadian clinical case definition [1] to those who met the Fukuda et al. CFS case definition.[2].

RESULTS

Findings indicated that fewer individuals met the Canadian criteria than the Fukuda et al. criteria. Those who met the Canadian criteria evidenced more severe symptoms and physical functioning impairment.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research should continue to compare existing case definitions and determine which criteria best select for this illness.

Minimum data elements for research reports on CFS

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is a debilitating condition that has received increasing attention from researchers in the past decade. However, it has become difficult to compare data collected in different laboratories due to the variability in basic information regarding descriptions of sampling methods, patient characteristics, and clinical assessments. The issue of variability in CFS research was recently highlighted at the NIH's 2011 State of the Knowledge of CFS meeting prompting researchers to consider the critical information that should be included in CFS research reports. To address this problem, we present our consensus on the minimum data elements that should be included in all CFS research reports, along with additional elements that are currently being evaluated in specific research studies that show promise as important patient descriptors for subgrouping of CFS. These recommendations are intended to improve the consistency of reported methods and the interpretability of reported results. Adherence to minimum standards and increased reporting consistency will allow for better comparisons among published CFS articles, provide guidance for future research and foster the generation of knowledge that can directly benefit the patient.