Key symptom domains to be assessed in fibromyalgia (outcome measures in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials)

Trends in the treatment of fibromyalgia in South Korea between 2011 and 2018: a retrospective analysis of cross-sectional health insurance data

OBJECTIVES

Fibromyalgia treatment trends vary globally; however, the trend in South Korea has not been investigated yet. This study aimed to analyse the fibromyalgia treatment trends in South Korea.

DESIGN

Retrospective, observational study using serial cross-sectional data.

SETTING

The National Patient Samples of the Korean Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service from 2011 to 2018 were used.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 31 059 patients with fibromyalgia were included in this study. The basic characteristics of the patients were stratified by sex, age and comorbidity. A patient was considered to have a condition if it was recorded as a principal diagnosis at least once in a year.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Trends in the types of medical visits and prescribed treatments were investigated and the values are presented as rates per 100 patients. The types of pharmacological treatment were presented according to the existing clinical guidelines. Additionally, combination prescription trends and associated characteristics were investigated.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 66.2% were female. Visits to internal medicine departments showed the most significant increase (2011: 11.34; 2018: 21.99; p<0.001). Non-pharmacological treatment rates declined (physical therapy 2011: 18.11; 2018: 13.69; p<0.001, acupuncture 2011: 52.03; 2018: 30.83; p<0.001). Prescription rates increased for analgesics, relaxants, antiepileptics and antidepressants. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug prescriptions had the highest increase (2011: 27.65; 2018: 40.02; p<0.001). Serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor prescriptions showed significant growth (2011: 2.4; 2018: 8.05; p<0.001). Prescription durations were generally longer for women (p<0.001), with higher rate increases in this group. Combinations of ≥3 medication classes increased (2011: 8.2; 2018: 9.64; p=0.041). Women were more likely to receive combination prescriptions (crude OR 1.47 (95% CI 1.29 to 1.68), adjusted 1.18 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.36)).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide basic reference data for the development and application of national guidelines for fibromyalgia.

The immunomodulatory effects of ethosuximide and sodium butyrate on experimentally induced fibromyalgia: The interaction between IL-4, synaptophysin, and TGF-β1/NF-κB signaling

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Fibromyalgia is a widespread chronic pain syndrome associated with several comorbid conditions that affect the quality of patients' life. Its pathogenesis is complex, and the treatment strategies are limited by partial efficacy and potential adverse effects. So, our aim was to investigate the possible ameliorative effects of ethosuximide and sodium butyrate on fibromyalgia and compare their effects to pregabalin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a mouse model of reserpine induced fibromyalgia, the effect of ethosuximide, sodium butyrate, and pregabalin was investigated. Evaluation of mechanical allodynia, cold hypersensitivity, anxiety, cognitive impairment, and depression was performed. Also, the brain and spinal cord tissue serotonin, dopamine and glutamate in addition to the serum levels of interleukin (IL)-4 and transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGF-β1) were assayed. Moreover, the expression of nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) synaptophysin was immunoassayed in the hippocampal tissues.

KEY FINDINGS

Ethosuximide and sodium butyrate restored the behavioral tests to the normal values except for the antidepressant effect which was evident only with ethosuximide. Both drugs elevated the levels of the anti-inflammatory cytokines IL-4 and TGF-β1, reduced the hippocampal NF-κB, and increased synaptophysin expression with superiority of sodium butyrate. Ethosuximide reduced only spinal cord and brain glutamate while improved brain dopamine while sodium butyrate elevated spinal cord dopamine and serotonin with no effect on glutamate. Also, sodium butyrate elevated brain serotonin and reduced glutamate with no effect on brain dopamine.

SIGNIFICANCE

Each of sodium butyrate and ethosuximide would serve as a promising therapeutic modality for management of fibromyalgia and its comorbid conditions.

Validation of the 2011 and 2016 American college of rheumatology diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia in a Chinese population

PURPOSE

To provide a foundation for clinical diagnosis, epidemiological investigation and intervention trials, we examined the reliability and validity of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2011 and 2016 survey diagnostic criteria among Chinese patients based on the fibromyalgia severity (FS) scale.

METHODS

In this study, 200 fibromyalgia patients diagnosed according to the 1990 criteria (1990c) were matched with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients based on age and gender. The FS scale score and its subscales were examined to determine their correlations with the revised fibromyalgia impact questionnaire (FIQR). Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed, and test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity were examined.

RESULTS

The area under the curve (AUC) for the ACR 2011c and 2016c was 0.870 and 0.845, respectively, and the sensitivity and specificity were 78.0% and 96.0% for the 2011c and 70.5% and 98.5% for the 2016c, respectively. The FS scale and its subscales were confirmed to exhibit good internal consistency, and they were significantly correlated with the FIQR, thereby indicating adequate construct validity. Using a lower cutoff value 11 points for the FS scale score based on the generalized pain requirement might be a more effective approach in the Chinese population; this approach yielded an AUC of 0.923 and a sensitivity of 87.0% and specificity of 97.5%.

CONCLUSION

The 2011c and 2016c are reliable instruments for diagnosing fibromyalgia patients in China. The FS scale could be a valid tool to assist in fibromyalgia diagnosis, and a cutoff value 11 points is more suitable in Chinese patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03381131.

Research Recommendations Following the Discovery of Pain Sensitizing IgG Autoantibodies in Fibromyalgia Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is the most common chronic widespread pain condition in rheumatology. Until recently, no clear pathophysiological mechanism for fibromyalgia had been established, resulting in management challenges. Recent research has indicated that serum immunoglobulin Gs (IgGs) may play a role in FMS. We undertook a research prioritisation exercise to identify the most pertinent research approaches that may lead to clinically implementable outputs.

METHODS

Research priority setting was conducted in five phases: situation analysis; design; expert group consultation; interim recommendations; consultation and revision. A dialogue model was used, and an international multi-stakeholder expert group was invited. Clinical, patient, industry, funder, and scientific expertise was represented throughout. Recommendation-consensus was determined via a voluntary closed eSurvey. Reporting guideline for priority setting of health research were employed to support implementation and maximise impact.

RESULTS

Arising from the expert group consultation (n = 29 participants), 39 interim recommendations were defined. A response rate of 81.5% was achieved in the consensus survey. Six recommendations were identified as high priority- and 15 as medium level priority. The recommendations range from aspects of fibromyalgia features that should be considered in future autoantibody research, to specific immunological investigations, suggestions for trial design in FMS, and therapeutic interventions that should be assessed in trials.

CONCLUSIONS

By applying the principles of strategic priority setting we directed research towards that which is implementable, thereby expediating the benefit to the FMS patient population. These recommendations are intended for patients, international professionals and grant-giving bodies concerned with research into causes and management of patients with fibromyalgia syndrome.

Flexibility exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Exercise training is commonly recommended for adults with fibromyalgia. We defined flexibility exercise training programs as those involving movements of a joint or a series of joints, through complete range of motion, thus targeting major muscle-tendon units. This review is one of a series of reviews updating the first review published in 2002.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of flexibility exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database), Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2017, unrestricted by language, and we reviewed the reference lists of retrieved trials to identify potentially relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized trials (RCTs) including adults diagnosed with fibromyalgia based on published criteria. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, trial withdrawals, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected articles for inclusion, extracted data, performed 'Risk of bias' assessments, and assessed the certainty of the body of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. All discrepancies were rechecked, and consensus was achieved by discussion.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs (743 people). Among these RCTs, flexibility exercise training was compared to an untreated control group, land-based aerobic training, resistance training, or other interventions (i.e. Tai Chi, Pilates, aquatic biodanza, friction massage, medications). Studies were at risk of selection, performance, and detection bias (due to lack of adequate randomization and allocation concealment, lack of participant or personnel blinding, and lack of blinding for self-reported outcomes). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcomes were self-reported and were expressed on a 0-to-100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs) indicate improvement). We prioritized the findings of flexibility exercise training compared to land-based aerobic training and present them fully here.Very low-certainty evidence showed that compared with land-based aerobic training, flexibility exercise training (five trials with 266 participants) provides no clinically important benefits with regard to HRQoL, pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function. Low-certainty evidence showed no difference between these groups for withdrawals at completion of the intervention (8 to 20 weeks).Mean HRQoL assessed on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) Total scale (0 to 100, higher scores indicating worse HRQoL) was 46 mm and 42 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (2 studies, 193 participants); absolute change was 4% worse (6% better to 14% worse), and relative change was 7.5% worse (10.5% better to 25.5% worse) in the flexibility group. Mean pain was 57 mm and 52 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (5 studies, 266 participants); absolute change was 5% worse (1% better to 11% worse), and relative change was 6.7% worse (2% better to 15.4% worse). Mean fatigue was 67 mm and 71 mm in the aerobic and flexibility groups, respectively (2 studies, 75 participants); absolute change was 4% better (13% better to 5% worse), and relative change was 6% better (19.4% better to 7.4% worse). Mean physical function was 23 points and 17 points in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (1 study, 60 participants); absolute change was 6% worse (4% better to 16% worse), and relative change was 14% worse (9.1% better to 37.1% worse). We found very low-certainty evidence of an effect for stiffness. Mean stiffness was 49 mm to 79 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (1 study, 15 participants); absolute change was 30% better (8% better to 51% better), and relative change was 39% better (10% better to 68% better). We found no evidence of an effect in all-cause withdrawal between the flexibility and aerobic groups (5 studies, 301 participants). Absolute change was 1% fewer withdrawals in the flexibility group (8% fewer to 21% more), and relative change in the flexibility group compared to the aerobic training intervention group was 3% fewer (39% fewer to 55% more). It is uncertain whether flexibility leads to long-term effects (36 weeks after a 12-week intervention), as the evidence was of low certainty and was derived from a single trial.Very low-certainty evidence indicates uncertainty in the risk of adverse events for flexibility exercise training. One adverse effect was described among the 132 participants allocated to flexibility training. One participant had tendinitis of the Achilles tendon (McCain 1988), but it is unclear if the tendinitis was a pre-existing condition.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When compared with aerobic training, it is uncertain whether flexibility improves outcomes such as HRQoL, pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function, as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Flexibility exercise training may lead to little or no difference for all-cause withdrawals. It is also uncertain whether flexibility exercise training has long-term effects due to the very low certainty of the evidence. We downgraded the evidence owing to the small number of trials and participants across trials, as well as due to issues related to unclear and high risk of bias (selection, performance, and detection biases). While flexibility exercise training appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), evidence on adverse events was scarce, therefore its safety is uncertain.

Mixed exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review is one of a series of reviews about exercise training for fibromyalgia that will replace the review titled "Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome", which was first published in 2002.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of mixed exercise training protocols that include two or more types of exercise (aerobic, resistance, flexibility) for adults with fibromyalgia against control (treatment as usual, wait list control), non exercise (e.g. biofeedback), or other exercise (e.g. mixed versus flexibility) interventions.Specific comparisons involving mixed exercise versus other exercises (e.g. resistance, aquatic, aerobic, flexibility, and whole body vibration exercises) were not assessed.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Thesis and Dissertations Abstracts, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), the Physiotherapy Evidence Databese (PEDro), Current Controlled Trials (to 2013), WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2017, unrestricted by language, to identify all potentially relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia that compared mixed exercise interventions with other or no exercise interventions. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the quality of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 RCTs (2088 participants; 98% female; average age 51 years) that compared mixed exercise interventions (including at least two of the following: aerobic or cardiorespiratory, resistance or muscle strengthening exercise, and flexibility exercise) versus control (e.g. wait list), non-exercise (e.g. biofeedback), and other exercise interventions. Design flaws across studies led to selection, performance, detection, and selective reporting biases. We prioritised the findings of mixed exercise compared to control and present them fully here.Twenty-one trials (1253 participants) provided moderate-quality evidence for all major outcomes but stiffness (low quality). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcome measures were self-reported and expressed on a 0 to 100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs) indicate improvement; we used a clinically important difference between groups of 15% relative difference). Results for mixed exercise versus control show that mean HRQL was 56 and 49 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (13 studies; 610 participants) with absolute improvement of 7% (3% better to 11% better) and relative improvement of 12% (6% better to 18% better). Mean pain was 58.6 and 53 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (15 studies; 832 participants) with absolute improvement of 5% (1% better to 9% better) and relative improvement of 9% (3% better to 15% better). Mean fatigue was 72 and 59 points in the control and exercise groups, respectively (1 study; 493 participants) with absolute improvement of 13% (8% better to 18% better) and relative improvement of 18% (11% better to 24% better). Mean stiffness was 68 and 61 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (5 studies; 261 participants) with absolute improvement of 7% (1% better to 12% better) and relative improvement of 9% (1% better to 17% better). Mean physical function was 49 and 38 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (9 studies; 477 participants) with absolute improvement of 11% (7% better to 15% better) and relative improvement of 22% (14% better to 30% better). Pooled analysis resulted in a moderate-quality risk ratio for all-cause withdrawals with similar rates across groups (11 per 100 and 12 per 100 in the control and intervention groups, respectively) (19 studies; 1065 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.51) with an absolute change of 1% (3% fewer to 5% more) and a relative change of 11% (28% fewer to 47% more). Across all 21 studies, no injuries or other adverse events were reported; however some participants experienced increased fibromyalgia symptoms (pain, soreness, or tiredness) during or after exercise. However due to low event rates, we are uncertain of the precise risks with exercise. Mixed exercise may improve HRQL and physical function and may decrease pain and fatigue; all-cause withdrawal was similar across groups, and mixed exercises may slightly reduce stiffness. For fatigue, physical function, HRQL, and stiffness, we cannot rule in or out a clinically relevant change, as the confidence intervals include both clinically important and unimportant effects.We found very low-quality evidence on long-term effects. In eight trials, HRQL, fatigue, and physical function improvement persisted at 6 to 52 or more weeks post intervention but improvements in stiffness and pain did not persist. Withdrawals and adverse events were not measured.It is uncertain whether mixed versus other non-exercise or other exercise interventions improve HRQL and physical function or decrease symptoms because the quality of evidence was very low. The interventions were heterogeneous, and results were often based on small single studies. Adverse events with these interventions were not measured, and thus uncertainty surrounds the risk of adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to control, moderate-quality evidence indicates that mixed exercise probably improves HRQL, physical function, and fatigue, but this improvement may be small and clinically unimportant for some participants; physical function shows improvement in all participants. Withdrawal was similar across groups. Low-quality evidence suggests that mixed exercise may slightly improve stiffness. Very low-quality evidence indicates that we are 'uncertain' whether the long-term effects of mixed exercise are maintained for all outcomes; all-cause withdrawals and adverse events were not measured. Compared to other exercise or non-exercise interventions, we are uncertain about the effects of mixed exercise because we found only very low-quality evidence obtained from small, very heterogeneous trials. Although mixed exercise appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), evidence on adverse events is scarce, so we are uncertain about its safety. We downgraded the evidence from these trials due to imprecision (small trials), selection bias (e.g. allocation), blinding of participants and care providers or outcome assessors, and selective reporting.

Association between initial opioid use and response to a brief interdisciplinary treatment program in fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the association between opioid use and treatment outcome (symptom severity, quality of life [QOL]) after a brief interdisciplinary fibromyalgia treatment program (FTP).

METHOD

Subjects (n = 971) with fibromyalgia participated in the FTP. They filled out the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) and the Short Form-36 Health Status Questionnaire (SF-36) at baseline and 6 to 12 months after the FTP. Post-treatment changes in FIQ and SF-36 scores were compared after stratifying the participants into opioid user and non-opioid user groups.

RESULTS

A total of 236 patients (24.3%) were opioid users. Compared with non-opioid users, the opioid users had worse symptom severity measured using FIQ total score (p < .001) and all subscales at baseline and post treatment, as well as worse QOL measured using all SF-36 subscales and physical and mental components. Comparison of least-square means of mean change of QOL between opioid users and non-opioid users after analysis of covariance adjusted patient characteristics and baseline scores showed that the FIQ subscale scores of physical impairment (p < .05), job ability (p < .05), and fatigue (p < .05) were significantly less improved in the opioid users compared with the non-opioid users. Moreover, the SF-36 subscale score of general health perception (p < .05) was significantly less improved in the opioid users compared with non-opioid users. However, post-treatment changes in mean scores for QOL subscale generally did not significantly differ in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid use did not affect response to the FTP, as measured using the FIQ total score or SF-36 physical and mental component summary scores. Furthermore, the opioid user group showed less improvement in the FIQ subscale scores of physical impairment, job ability, and fatigue and in the SF-36 subscale scores of general health perception.

The effects of slow-paced versus mechanically assisted breathing on autonomic function in fibromyalgia patients

Paced breathing has shown efficacy in fibromyalgia (FM), but the mechanisms associated with symptom change are largely unknown. We investigated whether changes in respiratory rate (RR) alone resulted in autonomic changes during normal, paced, and mechanically assisted breathing in untrained FM patients and controls. Participants included 20 FM patients and 14 controls matched for age and body mass index. During a single visit, participants completed three 15-minute breathing sessions: 1) normal breathing, 2) slow-paced breathing, and 3) mechanically assisted breathing (continuous positive airway pressure) while supine. Continuous blood pressure and electrocardiogram were recorded, and measures of heart rate variability (HRV) and spontaneous baroreceptor sensitivity (sBRS) were calculated. During normal breathing, FM patients had higher heart rate (HR), but lower HRV and sBRS variables compared to controls with no difference in RR. Compared to the paced breathing condition, FM patients had significantly lower HR with higher HRV and sBRS variables during mechanically assisted breathing, despite no significant change in RR. Mechanically assisted breathing provided greater benefits in autonomic function than paced breathing in untrained FM patients. Future research will be needed to elucidate the central pathways involved in these autonomic changes and whether training in paced breathing can eventually replicate the results seen in mechanically assisted patients.

Whole body vibration exercise training for fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Exercise training is commonly recommended for adults with fibromyalgia. We defined whole body vibration (WBV) exercise as use of a vertical or rotary oscillating platform as an exercise stimulus while the individual engages in sustained static positioning or dynamic movements. The individual stands on the platform, and oscillations result in vibrations transmitted to the subject through the legs. This review is one of a series of reviews that replaces the first review published in 2002.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate benefits and harms of WBV exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PEDro, Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, AMED, WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2016, unrestricted by language, to identify potentially relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with the diagnosis of fibromyalgia based on published criteria including a WBV intervention versus control or another intervention. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed risk of bias assessments, and assessed the quality of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. We used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies involving 150 middle-aged female participants from one country. Two studies had two treatment arms (71 participants) that compared WBV plus mixed exercise plus relaxation versus mixed exercise plus relaxation and placebo WBV versus control, and WBV plus mixed exercise versus mixed exercise and control; two studies had three treatment arms (79 participants) that compared WBV plus mixed exercise versus control and mixed relaxation placebo WBV. We judged the overall risk of bias as low for selection (random sequence generation), detection (objectively measured outcomes), attrition, and other biases; as unclear for selection bias (allocation concealment); and as high for performance, detection (self-report outcomes), and selective reporting biases.The WBV versus control comparison reported on three major outcomes assessed at 12 weeks post intervention based on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) (0 to 100 scale, lower score is better). Results for HRQL in the control group at end of treatment (59.13) showed a mean difference (MD) of -3.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] -10.81 to 3.35) for absolute HRQL, or improvement of 4% (11% better to 3% worse) and relative improvement of 6.7% (19.6% better to 6.1% worse). Results for withdrawals indicate that 14 per 100 and 10 per 100 in the intervention and control groups, respectively, withdrew from the intervention (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.27 to 7.67; absolute change 4%, 95% CI 16% fewer to 24% more; relative change 43% more, 95% CI 73% fewer to 667% more). The only adverse event reported was acute pain in the legs, for which one participant dropped out of the program. We judged the quality of evidence for all outcomes as very low. This study did not measure pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, or physical function. No outcomes in this comparison met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance.The WBV plus mixed exercise (aerobic, strength, flexibility, and relaxation) versus control study (N = 21) evaluated symptoms at six weeks post intervention using the FIQ. Results for HRQL at end of treatment (59.64) showed an MD of -16.02 (95% CI -31.57 to -0.47) for absolute HRQL, with improvement of 16% (0.5% to 32%) and relative change in HRQL of 24% (0.7% to 47%). Data showed a pain intensity MD of -28.22 (95% CI -43.26 to -13.18) for an absolute difference of 28% (13% to 43%) and a relative change of 39% improvement (18% to 60%); as well as a fatigue MD of -33 (95% CI -49 to -16) for an absolute difference of 33% (16% to 49%) and relative difference of 47% (95% CI 23% to 60%); and a stiffness MD of -26.27 (95% CI -42.96 to -9.58) for an absolute difference of 26% (10% to 43%) and a relative difference of 36.5% (23% to 60%). All-cause withdrawals occurred in 8 per 100 and 33 per 100 withdrawals in the intervention and control groups, respectively (two studies, N = 46; RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.12) for an absolute risk difference of 24% (3% to 51%). One participant exhibited a mild anxiety attack at the first session of WBV. No studies in this comparison reported on physical function. Several outcomes (based on the findings of one study) in this comparison met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance: HRQL, pain intensity, fatigue, and stiffness, which improved by 16%, 39%, 46%, and 36%, respectively. We found evidence of very low quality for all outcomes.The WBV plus mixed exercise versus other exercise provided very low quality evidence for all outcomes. Investigators evaluated outcomes on a 0 to 100 scale (lower score is better) for pain intensity (one study, N = 23; MD -16.36, 95% CI -29.49 to -3.23), HRQL (two studies, N = 49; MD -6.67, 95% CI -14.65 to 1.31), fatigue (one study, N = 23; MD -14.41, 95% CI -29.47 to 0.65), stiffness (one study, N = 23; MD -12.72, 95% CI -26.90 to 1.46), and all-cause withdrawal (three studies, N = 77; RR 0.72, 95% CI -0.17 to 3.11). Adverse events reported for the three studies included one anxiety attack at the first session of WBV and one dropout from the comparison group ("other exercise group") due to an injury that was not related to the program. No studies reported on physical function.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Whether WBV or WBV in addition to mixed exercise is superior to control or another intervention for women with fibromyalgia remains uncertain. The quality of evidence is very low owing to imprecision (few study participants and wide confidence intervals) and issues related to risk of bias. These trials did not measure major outcomes such as pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, and physical function. Overall, studies were few and were very small, which prevented meaningful estimates of harms and definitive conclusions about WBV safety.

Aerobic exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review is one of a series of reviews about exercise training for people with fibromyalgia that will replace the "Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome" review first published in 2002.

OBJECTIVES

• To evaluate the benefits and harms of aerobic exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia• To assess the following specific comparisons ० Aerobic versus control conditions (eg, treatment as usual, wait list control, physical activity as usual) ० Aerobic versus aerobic interventions (eg, running vs brisk walking) ० Aerobic versus non-exercise interventions (eg, medications, education) We did not assess specific comparisons involving aerobic exercise versus other exercise interventions (eg, resistance exercise, aquatic exercise, flexibility exercise, mixed exercise). Other systematic reviews have examined or will examine these comparisons (Bidonde 2014; Busch 2013).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry up to June 2016, unrestricted by language, and we reviewed the reference lists of retrieved trials to identify potentially relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia that compared aerobic training interventions (dynamic physical activity that increases breathing and heart rate to submaximal levels for a prolonged period) versus no exercise or another intervention. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed a risk of bias assessment, and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. We used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences between groups.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 RCTs (839 people). Studies were at risk of selection, performance, and detection bias (owing to lack of blinding for self-reported outcomes) and had low risk of attrition and reporting bias. We prioritized the findings when aerobic exercise was compared with no exercise control and present them fully here.Eight trials (with 456 participants) provided low-quality evidence for pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function; and moderate-quality evidence for withdrawals and HRQL at completion of the intervention (6 to 24 weeks). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcome measures were self-reported and were expressed on a 0 to 100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs)/standardized mean differences (SMDs) indicate improvement). Effects for aerobic exercise versus control were as follows: HRQL: mean 56.08; five studies; N = 372; MD -7.89, 95% CI -13.23 to -2.55; absolute improvement of 8% (3% to 13%) and relative improvement of 15% (5% to 24%); pain intensity: mean 65.31; six studies; N = 351; MD -11.06, 95% CI -18.34 to -3.77; absolute improvement of 11% (95% CI 4% to 18%) and relative improvement of 18% (7% to 30%); stiffness: mean 69; one study; N = 143; MD -7.96, 95% CI -14.95 to -0.97; absolute difference in improvement of 8% (1% to 15%) and relative change in improvement of 11.4% (21.4% to 1.4%); physical function: mean 38.32; three studies; N = 246; MD -10.16, 95% CI -15.39 to -4.94; absolute change in improvement of 10% (15% to 5%) and relative change in improvement of 21.9% (33% to 11%); and fatigue: mean 68; three studies; N = 286; MD -6.48, 95% CI -14.33 to 1.38; absolute change in improvement of 6% (12% improvement to 0.3% worse) and relative change in improvement of 8% (16% improvement to 0.4% worse). Pooled analysis resulted in a risk ratio (RR) of moderate quality for withdrawals (17 per 100 and 20 per 100 in control and intervention groups, respectively; eight studies; N = 456; RR 1.25, 95%CI 0.89 to 1.77; absolute change of 5% more withdrawals with exercise (3% fewer to 12% more).Three trials provided low-quality evidence on long-term effects (24 to 208 weeks post intervention) and reported that benefits for pain and function persisted but did not for HRQL or fatigue. Withdrawals were similar, and investigators did not assess stiffness and adverse events.We are uncertain about the effects of one aerobic intervention versus another, as the evidence was of low to very low quality and was derived from single trials only, precluding meta-analyses. Similarly, we are uncertain of the effects of aerobic exercise over active controls (ie, education, three studies; stress management training, one study; medication, one study) owing to evidence of low to very low quality provided by single trials. Most studies did not measure adverse events; thus we are uncertain about the risk of adverse events associated with aerobic exercise.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When compared with control, moderate-quality evidence indicates that aerobic exercise probably improves HRQL and all-cause withdrawal, and low-quality evidence suggests that aerobic exercise may slightly decrease pain intensity, may slightly improve physical function, and may lead to little difference in fatigue and stiffness. Three of the reported outcomes reached clinical significance (HRQL, physical function, and pain). Long-term effects of aerobic exercise may include little or no difference in pain, physical function, and all-cause withdrawal, and we are uncertain about long-term effects on remaining outcomes. We downgraded the evidence owing to the small number of included trials and participants across trials, and because of issues related to unclear and high risks of bias (performance, selection, and detection biases). Aerobic exercise appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), although evidence on adverse events is scarce, so we are uncertain about its safety.

Self-reported nonrestorative sleep in fibromyalgia - relationship to impairments of body functions, personal function factors, and quality of life

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was: 1) to determine variables that might characterize good or bad sleep; and 2) to describe the relationship between sleep, impairment of body functions, personal function factors, and quality of life based on quality of sleep in women with fibromyalgia (FM).

METHODS

This cross-sectional descriptive study included 224 consecutive patients diagnosed at a specialist center. These patients were mailed a questionnaire concerning sleep, body functions, personal factors, and health-related quality of life. In total, 145 completed questionnaires were collected.

RESULTS

Using sleep variables (sleep quality, waking up unrefreshed, and tiredness when getting up), we identified two subgroups - the good sleep subgroup and the bad sleep subgroup - of women with FM. These subgroups exhibited significantly different characteristics concerning pain intensity, psychological variables (depressed mood, anxiety, catastrophizing, and self-efficacy), impairments of body functions, and generic and health-related quality of life. The good sleep subgroup reported a significantly better situation, including higher employment/study rate. The bad sleep subgroup reported a greater use of sleep medication. Five variables determined inclusion into either a good sleep or a bad sleep subgroup: pain in the evening, self-efficacy, anxiety, and according to the Short Form health survey role emotional and physical functioning.

CONCLUSION

This study found that it was possible to identify two subgroups of women with FM based on quality of sleep variables. The two subgroups differed significantly with respect to pain, psychological factors, impairments of body functions, and perceived quality of life, where the subgroup with bad sleep had a worse situation.

The Use of Polysymptomatic Distress Categories in the Evaluation of Fibromyalgia (FM) and FM Severity

OBJECTIVE

The polysymptomatic distress (PSD) scale is derived from variables used in the 2010 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) fibromyalgia (FM) criteria modified for survey and clinical research. The scale is useful in measuring the effect of PSD over the full range of pain-related clinical symptoms, not just in those who are FM criteria-positive. However, no PSD scale categories have been defined to distinguish severity of illness in FM or in those who do not satisfy the FM criteria. We analyzed the scale and multiple covariates to develop clinical categories and to further validate the scale.

METHODS

FM was diagnosed according to the research criteria modification of the 2010 ACR FM criteria. We investigated categories in a large database of patients with pain (2732 with rheumatoid arthritis) and developed categories by using germane clinic variables that had been previously studied for severity groupings. By definition, FM cannot be diagnosed unless PSD is at least 12.

RESULTS

Based on population categories, regression analysis, and inspections of curvilinear relationships, we established PSD severity categories of none (0-3), mild (4-7), moderate (8-11), severe (12-19), and very severe (20-31). Categories were statistically distinct, and a generally linear relationship between PSD categories and covariate severity was noted.

CONCLUSION

PSD categories are clinically relevant and demonstrate FM type symptoms over the full range of clinical illness. Although FM criteria can be clinically useful, there is no clear-cut symptom distinction between FM (+) and FM (-), and PSD categories can aid in more effectively classifying patients.

Mind and body therapy for fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Mind-body interventions are based on the holistic principle that mind, body and behaviour are all interconnected. Mind-body interventions incorporate strategies that are thought to improve psychological and physical well-being, aim to allow patients to take an active role in their treatment, and promote people's ability to cope. Mind-body interventions are widely used by people with fibromyalgia to help manage their symptoms and improve well-being. Examples of mind-body therapies include psychological therapies, biofeedback, mindfulness, movement therapies and relaxation strategies.

OBJECTIVES

To review the benefits and harms of mind-body therapies in comparison to standard care and attention placebo control groups for adults with fibromyalgia, post-intervention and at three and six month follow-up.

SEARCH METHODS

Electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), AMED (EBSCO) and CINAHL (Ovid) were conducted up to 30 October 2013. Searches of reference lists were conducted and authors in the field were contacted to identify additional relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of mind-body interventions for adults with fibromyalgia were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies, extracted the data and assessed trials for low, unclear or high risk of bias. Any discrepancy was resolved through discussion and consensus. Continuous outcomes were analysed using mean difference (MD) where the same outcome measure and scoring method was used and standardised mean difference (SMD) where different outcome measures were used. For binary data standard estimation of the risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) was used.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-four papers describing 61 trials were identified, with 4234 predominantly female participants. The nature of fibromyalgia varied from mild to severe across the study populations. Twenty-six studies were classified as having a low risk of bias for all domains assessed. The findings of mind-body therapies compared with usual care were prioritised.There is low quality evidence that in comparison to usual care controls psychological therapies have favourable effects on physical functioning (SMD -0.4, 95% CI -0.6 to -0.3, -7.5% absolute change, 2 point shift on a 0 to 100 scale), pain (SMD -0.3, 95% CI -0.5 to -0.2, -3.5% absolute change, 2 point shift on a 0 to 100 scale) and mood (SMD -0.5, 95% CI -0.6 to -0.3, -4.8% absolute change, 3 point shift on a 20 to 80 scale). There is very low quality evidence of more withdrawals in the psychological therapy group in comparison to usual care controls (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.69, 6% absolute risk difference). There is lack of evidence of a difference between the number of adverse events in the psychological therapy and control groups (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.50, 4% absolute risk difference).There was very low quality evidence that biofeedback in comparison to usual care controls had an effect on physical functioning (SMD -0.1, 95% CI -0.4 to 0.3, -1.2% absolute change, 1 point shift on a 0 to 100 scale), pain (SMD -2.6, 95% CI -91.3 to 86.1, -2.6% absolute change) and mood (SMD 0.1, 95% CI -0.3 to 0.5, 1.9% absolute change, less than 1 point shift on a 0 to 90 scale) post-intervention. In view of the quality of evidence we cannot be certain that biofeedback has a little or no effect on these outcomes. There was very low quality evidence that biofeedback led to more withdrawals from the study (RR 4.08, 95% CI 1.43 to 11.62, 20% absolute risk difference). No adverse events were reported.There was no advantage observed for mindfulness in comparison to usual care for physical functioning (SMD -0.3, 95% CI -0.6 to 0.1, -4.8% absolute change, 4 point shift on a scale 0 to 100), pain (SMD -0.1, CI -0.4 to 0.3, -1.3% absolute change, less than 1 point shift on a 0 to 10 scale), mood (SMD -0.2, 95% CI -0.5 to 0.0, -3.7% absolute change, 2 point shift on a 20 to 80 scale) or withdrawals (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.72, 2% absolute risk difference) between the two groups post-intervention. However, the quality of the evidence was very low for pain and moderate for mood and number of withdrawals. No studies reported any adverse events.Very low quality evidence revealed that movement therapies in comparison to usual care controls improved pain (MD -2.3, CI -4.2 to -0.4, -23% absolute change) and mood (MD -9.8, 95% CI -18.5 to -1.2, -16.4% absolute change) post-intervention. There was no advantage for physical functioning (SMD -0.2, 95% CI -0.5 to 0.2, -3.4% absolute change, 2 point shift on a 0 to 100 scale), participant withdrawals (RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.38, 11% absolute difference) or adverse events (RR 4.62, 95% CI 0.23 to 93.92, 4% absolute risk difference) between the two groups, however rare adverse events may include worsening of pain.Low quality evidence revealed that relaxation based therapies in comparison to usual care controls showed an advantage for physical functioning (MD -8.3, 95% CI -10.1 to -6.5, -10.4% absolute change) and pain (SMD -1.0, 95% CI -1.6 to -0.5, -3.5% absolute change, 2 point shift on a 0 to 78 scale) but not for mood (SMD -4.4, CI -14.5 to 5.6, -7.4% absolute change) post-intervention. There was no difference between the groups for number of withdrawals (RR 4.40, 95% CI 0.59 to 33.07, 31% absolute risk difference) and no adverse events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Psychological interventions therapies may be effective in improving physical functioning, pain and low mood for adults with fibromyalgia in comparison to usual care controls but the quality of the evidence is low. Further research on the outcomes of therapies is needed to determine if positive effects identified post-intervention are sustained. The effectiveness of biofeedback, mindfulness, movement therapies and relaxation based therapies remains unclear as the quality of the evidence was very low or low. The small number of trials and inconsistency in the use of outcome measures across the trials restricted the analysis.

Aquatic exercise training for fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review examined the effects of supervised group aquatic training programs (led by an instructor). We defined aquatic training as exercising in a pool while standing at waist, chest, or shoulder depth. This review is part of the update of the 'Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome' review first published in 2002, and previously updated in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the benefits and harms of aquatic exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 2 (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Health Technology Assessment Database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, Dissertation Abstracts, WHO international Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and AMED, as well as other sources (i.e., reference lists from key journals, identified articles, meta-analyses, and reviews of all types of treatment for fibromyalgia) from inception to October 2013. Using Cochrane methods, we screened citations, abstracts, and full-text articles. Subsequently, we identified aquatic exercise training studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Selection criteria were: a) full-text publication of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in adults diagnosed with fibromyalgia based on published criteria, and b) between-group data for an aquatic intervention and a control or other intervention. We excluded studies if exercise in water was less than 50% of the full intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data (24 outcomes), of which we designated seven as major outcomes: multidimensional function, self reported physical function, pain, stiffness, muscle strength, submaximal cardiorespiratory function, withdrawal rates and adverse effects. We resolved discordance through discussion. We evaluated interventions using mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Where two or more studies provided data for an outcome, we carried out meta-analysis. In addition, we set and used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 aquatic exercise training studies (N = 881; 866 women and 15 men). Nine studies compared aquatic exercise to control, five studies compared aquatic to land-based exercise, and two compared aquatic exercise to a different aquatic exercise program.We rated the risk of bias related to random sequence generation (selection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), selective reporting (reporting bias), blinding of outcome assessors (detection bias), and other bias as low. We rated blinding of participants and personnel (selection and performance bias) and allocation concealment (selection bias) as low risk and unclear. The assessment of the evidence showed limitations related to imprecision, high statistical heterogeneity, and wide confidence intervals. Aquatic versus controlWe found statistically significant improvements (P value < 0.05) in all of the major outcomes. Based on a 100-point scale, multidimensional function improved by six units (MD -5.97, 95% CI -9.06 to -2.88; number needed to treat (NNT) 5, 95% CI 3 to 9), self reported physical function by four units (MD -4.35, 95% CI -7.77 to -0.94; NNT 6, 95% CI 3 to 22), pain by seven units (MD -6.59, 95% CI -10.71 to -2.48; NNT 5, 95% CI 3 to 8), and stiffness by 18 units (MD -18.34, 95% CI -35.75 to -0.93; NNT 3, 95% CI 2 to 24) more in the aquatic than the control groups. The SMD for muscle strength as measured by knee extension and hand grip was 0.63 standard deviations higher compared to the control group (SMD 0.63, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; NNT 4, 95% CI 3 to 12) and cardiovascular submaximal function improved by 37 meters on six-minute walk test (95% CI 4.14 to 69.92). Only two major outcomes, stiffness and muscle strength, met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance (improved by 27% and 37% respectively). Withdrawals were similar in the aquatic and control groups and adverse effects were poorly reported, with no serious adverse effects reported. Aquatic versus land-basedThere were no statistically significant differences between interventions for multidimensional function, self reported physical function, pain or stiffness: 0.91 units (95% CI -4.01 to 5.83), -5.85 units (95% CI -12.33 to 0.63), -0.75 units (95% CI -10.72 to 9.23), and two units (95% CI -8.88 to 1.28) respectively (all based on a 100-point scale), or in submaximal cardiorespiratory function (three seconds on a 100-meter walk test, 95% CI -1.77 to 7.77). We found a statistically significant difference between interventions for strength, favoring land-based training (2.40 kilo pascals grip strength, 95% CI 4.52 to 0.28). None of the outcomes in the aquatic versus land comparison reached clinically relevant differences of 15%. Withdrawals were similar in the aquatic and land groups and adverse effects were poorly reported, with no serious adverse effects in either group. Aquatic versus aquatic (Ai Chi versus stretching in the water, exercise in pool water versus exercise in sea water)Among the major outcomes the only statistically significant difference between interventions was for stiffness, favoring Ai Chi (1.00 on a 100-point scale, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.69).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low to moderate quality evidence relative to control suggests that aquatic training is beneficial for improving wellness, symptoms, and fitness in adults with fibromyalgia. Very low to low quality evidence suggests that there are benefits of aquatic and land-based exercise, except in muscle strength (very low quality evidence favoring land). No serious adverse effects were reported.

Exercise Profile and Diastolic Functions Measured via Tissue Doppler Imaging of Fibromyalgia Patients

Background

Our aim was to evaluate electrocardiographic and echocardiographic properties and exercise response of patients with fibromyalgia (FM).

Methods

The study included 60 women with primary FM and 30 healthy individuals. Resting electrocardiography, echocardiography and exercise treadmill test were used to compare these two groups. At apical four-chamber window, samples of transmitral diastolic inflow and tissue Doppler imaging of left ventricle lateral wall were obtained. Left ventricle ejection fraction was measured via modified Simpson’s method. Exercise duration, maximal exercise capacity, maximal heart rate (HR) (bpm), maximal HR (%), rate-pressure product at maximal HR (bpm × mmHg), heart rate recovery 1 (bpm), heart rate recovery 2 (bpm) and chronotropic reserve (%) values were calculated.

Results

Resting HR and QTc values were similar in both groups. Echocardiographic measurements in both groups did not reveal statistically significant difference except left ventricle end-diastolic diameter and left atrial diameter. Parameters related to diastolic function of the left ventricle did not differ significantly in both groups. Also, there was not any significant difference between the groups for E/E’ ratio and chronotropic reserve. Exercise treadmill test results were statistically similar for both groups.

Conclusion

Patients with FM presented a normal HR response to exercise and those patients had normal diastolic function similar to their healthy controls.

Resistance exercise training for fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia is characterized by chronic widespread pain that leads to reduced physical function. Exercise training is commonly recommended as a treatment for management of symptoms. We examined the literature on resistance training for individuals with fibromyalgia. Resistance training is exercise performed against a progressive resistance with the intention of improving muscle strength, muscle endurance, muscle power, or a combination of these.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of resistance exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia. We compared resistance training versus control and versus other types of exercise training.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched nine electronic databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, Dissertation Abstracts, Current Controlled Trials, World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, AMED) and other sources for published full-text articles. The date of the last search was 5 March 2013. Two review authors independently screened 1856 citations, 766 abstracts and 156 full-text articles. We included five studies that met our inclusion criteria.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Selection criteria included: a) randomized clinical trial, b) diagnosis of fibromyalgia based on published criteria, c) adult sample, d) full-text publication, and e) inclusion of between-group data comparing resistance training versus a control or other physical activity intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted intervention and outcome data. We resolved disagreements between the two review authors and questions regarding interpretation of study methods by discussion within the pairs or when necessary the issue was taken to the full team of 11 members. We extracted 21 outcomes of which seven were designated as major outcomes: multidimensional function, self reported physical function, pain, tenderness, muscle strength, attrition rates, and adverse effects. We evaluated benefits and harms of the interventions using standardized mean differences (SMD) or mean differences (MD) or risk ratios or Peto odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where two or more studies provided data for an outcome, we carried out a meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

The literature search yielded 1865 citations with five studies meeting the selection criteria. One of the studies that had three arms contributed data for two comparisons. In the included studies, there were 219 women participants with fibromyalgia, 95 of whom were assigned to resistance training programs. Three randomized trials compared 16 to 21 weeks of moderate- to high-intensity resistance training versus a control group. Two studies compared eight weeks of progressive resistance training (intensity as tolerated) using free weights or body weight resistance exercise versus aerobic training (ie, progressive treadmill walking, indoor and outdoor walking), and one study compared 12 weeks of low-intensity resistance training using hand weights (1 to 3 lbs (0.45 to 1.36 kg)) and elastic tubing versus flexibility exercise (static stretches to major muscle groups).Statistically significant differences (MD; 95% CI) favoring the resistance training interventions over control group(s) were found in multidimensional function (Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total decreased 16.75 units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -23.31 to -10.19), self reported physical function (-6.29 units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -10.45 to -2.13), pain (-3.3 cm on a 10-cm scale; 95% CI -6.35 to -0.26), tenderness (-1.84 out of 18 tender points; 95% CI -2.6 to -1.08), and muscle strength (27.32 kg force on bilateral concentric leg extension; 95% CI 18.28 to 36.36).Differences between the resistance training group(s) and the aerobic training groups were not statistically significant for multidimensional function (5.48 on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -0.92 to 11.88), self reported physical function (-1.48 units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -6.69 to 3.74) or tenderness (SMD -0.13; 95% CI -0.55 to 0.30). There was a statistically significant reduction in pain (0.99 cm on a 10-cm scale; 95% CI 0.31 to 1.67) favoring the aerobic groups.Statistically significant differences were found between a resistance training group and a flexibility group favoring the resistance training group for multidimensional function (-6.49 FIQ units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -12.57 to -0.41) and pain (-0.88 cm on a 10-cm scale; 95% CI -1.57 to -0.19), but not for tenderness (-0.46 out of 18 tender points; 95% CI -1.56 to 0.64) or strength (4.77 foot pounds torque on concentric knee extension; 95% CI -2.40 to 11.94). This evidence was classified low quality due to the low number of studies and risk of bias assessment. There were no statistically significant differences in attrition rates between the interventions. In general, adverse effects were poorly recorded, but no serious adverse effects were reported. Assessment of risk of bias was hampered by poor written descriptions (eg, allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessors). The lack of a priori protocols and lack of care provider blinding were also identified as methodologic concerns.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence (rated as low quality) suggested that moderate- and moderate- to high-intensity resistance training improves multidimensional function, pain, tenderness, and muscle strength in women with fibromyalgia. The evidence (rated as low quality) also suggested that eight weeks of aerobic exercise was superior to moderate-intensity resistance training for improving pain in women with fibromyalgia. There was low-quality evidence that 12 weeks of low-intensity resistance training was superior to flexibility exercise training in women with fibromyalgia for improvements in pain and multidimensional function. There was low-quality evidence that women with fibromyalgia can safely perform moderate- to high-resistance training.

Opioid use in fibromyalgia is associated with negative health related measures in a prospective cohort study

As pain is the cardinal symptom of fibromyalgia (FM), strategies directed towards pain relief are an integral component of treatment. Opioid medications comprise a category of pharmacologic treatments which have impact on pain in various conditions with best evidence for acute pain relief. Although opioid therapy other than tramadol has never been formally tested for treatment of pain in FM, these agents are commonly used by patients. We have examined the effect of opioid treatments in patients diagnosed with FM and followed longitudinally in a multidisciplinary pain center over a period of 2 years. In this first study reporting on health related measures and opioid use in FM, opioid users had poorer symptoms and functional and occupational status compared to nonusers. Although opioid users may originally have had more severe symptoms at the onset of disease, we have no evidence that these agents improved status beyond standard care and may even have contributed to a less favourable outcome. Only a formal study of opioid use in FM will clarify this issue, but until then physicians must be vigilant regarding the multiple adverse consequences of opioid therapy.

The 2010 American college of rheumatology fibromyalgia survey diagnostic criteria and symptom severity scale is a valid and reliable tool in a French speaking fibromyalgia cohort

Background

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a pain condition with associated symptoms contributing to distress. The Fibromyalgia Survey Diagnostic Criteria and Severity Scale (FSDC) is a patient-administered questionnaire assessing diagnosis and symptom severity. Locations of body pain measured by the Widespread Pain Index (WPI), and the Symptom Severity scale (SS) measuring fatigue, unrefreshing sleep, cognitive and somatic complaints provide a score (0–31), measuring a composite of polysymptomatic distress. The reliability and validity of the translated French version of the FSDC was evaluated.

Methods

The French FSDC was administered twice to 73 FM patients, and was correlated with measures of symptom status including: Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for global severity and pain. Test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity were evaluated.

Results

Test-retest reliability was between .600 and .888 for the 25 single items of the FSDC, and .912 for the total FSDC, with all correlations significant (p < 0.0001). There was good internal consistency measured by Cronbach’s alpha (.846 for FSDC assessment 1, and .867 for FSDC assessment 2). Construct validity showed significant correlations between the FSDC and FIQ 0.670, HAQ 0.413, MPQ 0.562, global VAS 0.591, and pain VAS 0.663 (all p<0.001).

Conclusions

The French FSDC is a valid instrument in French FM patients with reliability and construct validity. It is easily completed, simple to score, and has the potential to become the standard for measurement of polysymptomatic distress in FM.

A framework for fibromyalgia management for primary care providers

Fibromyalgia is a chronic widespread pain disorder commonly associated with comorbid symptoms, including fatigue and nonrestorative sleep. As in the management of other chronic medical disorders, the approach for fibromyalgia management follows core principles of comprehensive assessment, education, goal setting, multimodal treatment including pharmacological (eg, pregabalin, duloxetine, milnacipran) and nonpharmacological therapies (eg, physical activity, behavioral therapy, sleep hygiene, education), and regular education and monitoring of treatment response and progress. Based on these core management principles, this review presents a framework for primary care providers through which they can develop a patient-centered treatment program for patients with fibromyalgia. This proactive and systematic treatment approach encourages ongoing education and patient self-management and is designed for use in the primary care setting.

Pharmacotherapy of fibromyalgia

There have been substantial advances in the pharmacotherapy of fibromyalgia (FM), which have occurred in parallel with advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology of FM in the past several years. Consortia of researchers have established a core set of symptom domains, which constitute the condition of FM, including pain, fatigue, sleep and mood disturbance and cognitive dysfunction, which significantly impact a patient's overall well-being and ability to function. Outcome measures, which assess these domains, both singly and in composite format, are showing increasing reliability to discriminate between the treatment and placebo arms in clinical trials of emerging therapies, which are targeting the pathophysiologic mechanisms of FM. Several different medications, including the serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, duloxetine and milnacipran, and the α(2)δ modulator, pregabalin, have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the management of FM, based on their clinically meaningful and durable effect on pain in monotherapy trials. They also have been shown to beneficially effect patient global impression of change, function and variably other key symptom domains, such as fatigue, sleep disturbance and cognition. Other medicines, although they have not gone through the formal approval process, have also shown efficacy in multiple domains of FM. Although combination trials have generally not yet been performed, the combined use of medicines with complementary mechanisms of action is rational, and, when done with appropriate caution, will likely be shown to be safe and well tolerated. Adjunctive therapy with medicines targeted at specific symptom domains, such as sleep, as well as treatments aimed at common co-morbid conditions, such as irritable bowel syndrome, or disease states, such as rheumatoid arthritis, should be considered for the purpose of reducing the patient's overall symptom burden. Current therapies neither completely treat FM symptoms nor benefit all patients; thus, further research on new therapies with different mechanisms and side-effect profiles is needed.

Improving the recognition and diagnosis of fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic widespread pain disorder often seen in primary care practices. Advances in the understanding of FM pathophysiology and clinical presentation have improved the recognition and diagnosis of FM in clinical practice. Fibromyalgia is a clinical diagnosis based on signs and symptoms and is appropriate for primary care practitioners to make. The hallmark symptoms used to identify FM are chronic widespread pain, fatigue, and sleep disturbances. Awareness of common mimics of FM and comorbid disorders will increase confidence in establishing a diagnosis of FM.