Patients' experiences and effects of non-pharmacological treatment for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome - a scoping mixed methods review

Patient perspectives of recovery from myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome: An interpretive description study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), also called chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), is characterised by persistent fatigue, postexertional malaise, and cognitive dysfunction. It is a complex, long-term, and debilitating illness without widely effective treatments. This study describes the treatment choices and experiences of ME/CFS patients who have experienced variable levels of recovery.

METHOD

Interpretive description study consisting of semi-structured qualitative interviews with 33 people who met the US Centers for Disease Control (2015) diagnostic criteria for ME/CFS and report recovery or symptom improvement.

RESULTS

Twenty-six participants endorsed partial recovery, and seven reported full recovery from ME/CFS. Participants reported expending significant time and energy to identify, implement, and adapt therapeutic interventions, often without the guidance of a medical practitioner. They formulated individualised treatment plans reflecting their understanding of their illness and personal resources. Most fully recovered participants attributed their success to mind-body approaches.

CONCLUSION

Patients with ME/CFS describe independently constructing and managing treatment plans, due to a lack of health system support. Stigmatised and dismissive responses from clinicians precipitated disengagement from the medical system and prompted use of other forms of treatment.

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.

Effects of traditional Chinese mind-body exercises for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is a global public health concern. We performed this systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effects and safety of traditional Chinese mind-body exercises (TCME) for patients with CFS.

Methods

We comprehensively searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP databases, and Wanfang Data from inception to October 2022 for eligible RCTs of TCME for CFS management. We used Cochran's Q statistic and I2 to assess heterogeneity and conducted subgroup analyses based on different types of TCME, background therapy, and types of fatigue. We also assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

Results

We included 13 studies (n = 1187) with a maximal follow-up of 12 weeks. TCME included Qigong and Tai Chi. At the end of the treatment, compared with passive control, TCME probably reduces the severity of fatigue (standardised mean differences (SMD) = 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.64, 1.07, moderate certainty), depression (SMD = 0.53; 95% CI = 0.34, 0.72, moderate certainty), anxiety (SMD = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.11, 0.48, moderate certainty), sleep quality (SMD = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.10, 0.57, low certainty) and mental functioning (SMD = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.50, 1.29, low certainty). Compared with other active control therapies, TCME results in little to no difference in the severity of fatigue (SMD = 0.08; 95% CI = -0.18, 0.34, low certainty). For long-term outcomes, TCME may improve anxiety (SMD = 1.74; 95% CI = 0.44, 3.03, low certainty) compared to passive control. We did not identify TCME-related serious adverse events.

Conclusions

In patients with CFS, TCME probably reduces post-intervention fatigue, depression, and anxiety and may improve sleep quality and mental function compared with passive control, but has limited long-term effects. These findings will help health professionals and patients with better clinical decision-making.

Registration

PROSPERO: CRD42022329157.

Exploring the acceptability of behavioral interventions for veterans with persistent "medically unexplained" physical symptoms

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the factors that led to enrollment in, and satisfaction with, behavioral interventions for Veterans living with Gulf War Illness (GWI).

METHODS

One-on-one interviews were conducted pre- and post-intervention with participants randomized to receive either telephone delivered problem-solving treatment (n = 51) or health education (N = 49). A total of 99 Veterans were interviewed pre-intervention and 60 post-intervention. Qualitative data were thematically coded and similarities in themes across the two interventions were examined.

RESULTS

Before the study began, participants reported desiring to learn new information about their GWI, learn symptom-management strategies, and support improvements to care for other patients with GWI. After the intervention, Veterans felt positively about both interventions because they built strong therapeutic relationships with providers, their experiences were validated by providers, and they were provided GWI information and symptom-management strategies. Results also suggested that interventions do not have to be designed to meet all of the needs held by patients to be acceptable. A minority of participants described that they did not benefit from the interventions.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that satisfaction with behavioral interventions for GWI is driven by a strong therapeutic relationship, validating patient's experiences with GWI, and the intervention meeting some of the patient's needs, particularly increasing knowledge of GWI and improving symptom management.

The evidence base for physiotherapy in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome when considering post-exertional malaise: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Background

Due to the inconsistent use of diagnostic criteria in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), it is unsure whether physiotherapeutic management regarded effective in ME/CFS is appropriate for patients diagnosed with criteria that consider post-exertional malaise (PEM) as a hallmark feature.

Purpose

To appraise current evidence of the effects of physiotherapy on symptoms and functioning in ME/CFS patients in view of the significance of PEM in the applied diagnostic criteria for inclusion.

Methods

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials published over the last two decades was conducted. Studies evaluating physiotherapeutic interventions for adult ME/CFS patients were included. The diagnostic criteria sets were classified into three groups according to the extent to which the importance of PEM was emphasized: chronic fatigue (CF; PEM not mentioned as a criterion), CFS (PEM included as an optional or minor criterion) or ME (PEM is a required symptom). The main results of included studies were synthesized in relation to the classification of the applied diagnostic criteria. In addition, special attention was given to the tolerability of the interventions.

Results

Eighteen RCTs were included in the systematic review: three RCTs with CF patients, 14 RCTs with CFS patients and one RCT covering ME patients with PEM. Intervention effects, if any, seemed to disappear with more narrow case definitions, increasing objectivity of the outcome measures and longer follow-up.

Conclusion

Currently, there is no scientific evidence when it comes to effective physiotherapy for ME patients. Applying treatment that seems effective for CF or CFS patients may have adverse consequences for ME patients and should be avoided.