Work Rehabilitation and Medical Retirement for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Patients. A Review and Appraisal of Diagnostic Strategies

[Interdisciplinary, collaborative D-A-CH (Germany, Austria and Switzerland) consensus statement concerning the diagnostic and treatment of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome]

Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a severe, chronic multisystemic disease which, depending on its severity, can lead to considerable physical and cognitive impairment, loss of ability to work and the need for nursing care including artificial nutrition and, in very severe cases, even death.The aim of this D-A-CH (Germany, Austria, Switzerland) consensus statement is 1) to summarize the current state of knowledge on ME/CFS, 2) to highlight the Canadian Consensus Criteria (CCC) as clinical criteria for diagnostics with a focus on the leading symptom post-exertional malaise (PEM) and 3) to provide an overview of current options and possible future developments, particularly with regard to diagnostics and therapy. The D-A-CH consensus statement is intended to support physicians, therapists and valuer in diagnosing patients with suspected ME/CFS by means of adequate anamnesis and clinical-physical examinations as well as the recommended clinical CCC, using the questionnaires and other examination methods presented. The overview of the two pillars of therapy for ME/CFS, pacing and symptom-relieving therapy options, is intended not only to provide orientation for physicians and therapists, but also to support decision-makers from healthcare policy and insurance companies in determining which therapy options should already be reimbursable by them at this point in time for the indication ME/CFS.

Systematic review of fatigue severity in ME/CFS patients: insights from randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) is a debilitating illness medically unexplained, affecting approximately 1% of the global population. Due to the subjective complaint, assessing the exact severity of fatigue is a clinical challenge, thus, this study aimed to produce comprehensive features of fatigue severity in ME/CFS patients.

METHODS

We systematically extracted the data for fatigue levels of participants in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) targeting ME/CFS from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL throughout January 31, 2024. We normalized each different measurement to a maximum 100-point scale and performed a meta-analysis to assess fatigue severity by subgroups of age, fatigue domain, intervention, case definition, and assessment tool, respectively.

RESULTS

Among the total of 497 relevant studies, 60 RCTs finally met our eligibility criteria, which included a total of 7088 ME/CFS patients (males 1815, females 4532, and no information 741). The fatigue severity of the whole 7,088 patients was 77.9 (95% CI 74.7-81.0), showing 77.7 (95% CI 74.3-81.0) from 54 RCTs in 6,706 adults and 79.6 (95% CI 69.8-89.3) from 6 RCTs in 382 adolescents. Regarding the domain of fatigue, 'cognitive' (74.2, 95% CI 65.4-83.0) and 'physical' fatigue (74.3, 95% CI 68.3-80.3) were a little higher than 'mental' fatigue (70.1, 95% CI 64.4-75.8). The ME/CFS participants for non-pharmacological intervention (79.1, 95% CI 75.2-83.0) showed a higher fatigue level than those for pharmacological intervention (75.5, 95% CI 70.0-81.0). The fatigue levels of ME/CFS patients varied according to diagnostic criteria and assessment tools adapted in RCTs, likely from 54.2 by ICC (International Consensus Criteria) to 83.6 by Canadian criteria and 54.2 by MFS (Mental Fatigue Scale) to 88.6 by CIS (Checklist Individual Strength), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review firstly produced comprehensive features of fatigue severity in patients with ME/CFS. Our data will provide insights for clinicians in diagnosis, therapeutic assessment, and patient management, as well as for researchers in fatigue-related investigations.

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: the biology of a neglected disease

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) is a chronic, debilitating disease characterised by a wide range of symptoms that severely impact all aspects of life. Despite its significant prevalence, ME/CFS remains one of the most understudied and misunderstood conditions in modern medicine. ME/CFS lacks standardised diagnostic criteria owing to variations in both inclusion and exclusion criteria across different diagnostic guidelines, and furthermore, there are currently no effective treatments available. Moving beyond the traditional fragmented perspectives that have limited our understanding and management of the disease, our analysis of current information on ME/CFS represents a significant paradigm shift by synthesising the disease's multifactorial origins into a cohesive model. We discuss how ME/CFS emerges from an intricate web of genetic vulnerabilities and environmental triggers, notably viral infections, leading to a complex series of pathological responses including immune dysregulation, chronic inflammation, gut dysbiosis, and metabolic disturbances. This comprehensive model not only advances our understanding of ME/CFS's pathophysiology but also opens new avenues for research and potential therapeutic strategies. By integrating these disparate elements, our work emphasises the necessity of a holistic approach to diagnosing, researching, and treating ME/CFS, urging the scientific community to reconsider the disease's complexity and the multifaceted approach required for its study and management.

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.

Do diagnostic criteria for ME matter to patient experience with services and interventions? Key results from an online RDS survey targeting fatigue patients in Norway

Public health and welfare systems request documentation on approaches to diagnose, treat, and manage myalgic encephalomyelitis and assess disability-benefit conditions. Our objective is to document ME patients' experiences with services/interventions and assess differences between those meeting different diagnostic criteria, importantly the impact of post-exertional malaise. We surveyed 660 fatigue patients in Norway using respondent-driven sampling and applied validated DePaul University algorithms to estimate Canadian and Fukuda criteria proxies. Patients on average perceived most interventions as having low-to-negative health effects. Responses differed significantly between sub-groups for some key interventions. The PEM score was strongly associated with the experience of most interventions. Better designed and targeted interventions are needed to prevent harm to the patient group. The PEM score appears to be a strong determinant and adequate tool for assessing patient tolerance for certain interventions. There is no known treatment for ME, and "do-no-harm" should be a guiding principle in all practice.

The Draft Report by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Healthcare Does Not Provide Any Evidence That Graded Exercise Therapy and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Are Safe and Effective Treatments for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

The German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Healthcare (IQWiG) recently published its draft report to the government about myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). The IQWiG concluded that graded exercise therapy (GET) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) should be recommended in the treatment for mild and moderate ME/CFS based on two CBT and two GET studies. In this article, we reviewed the evidence used by IQWiG to support their claims, because their conclusion is diametrically opposed to the conclusion by the British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in its recently updated ME/CFS guidelines. Our analysis shows that the trials IQWiG used in support suffered from serious flaws, which included badly designed control groups; relying on subjective primary outcomes in non-blinded studies; alliance and response shift bias, including patients in their trials who did not have the disease under investigation, selective reporting, making extensive endpoint changes and low to very low adherence of treatments. Our analysis also shows that the report itself used one CBT and one GET study that both examined a different treatment. The report also used a definition of CBT that does not reflect the way it is being used in ME/CFS or was tested in the studies. The report noted that one study used a wrong definition of post-exertional malaise (PEM), the main characteristic of the disease, according to the report. Yet, it ignored the consequence of this, that less than the required minimum percentage of patients had the disease under investigation in that study. It also ignored the absence of improvement on most of the subjective outcomes, as well as the fact that the IQWiG methods handbook states that one should use objective outcomes and not rely on subjective outcomes in non-blinded studies. The report concluded that both treatments did not lead to objective improvement in the six-minute walk test but then ignored that. The report did not analyze the other objective outcomes of the studies (step test and occupational and benefits status), which showed a null effect. Finally, the report states that the studies do not report on safety yet assumes that the treatments are safe based on a tendency towards small subjective improvements in fatigue and physical functioning, even though the adherence to the treatments was (very) low and the studies included many patients who did not have the disease under investigation and, consequently, did not suffer from exertion intolerance contrary to ME/CFS patients. At the same time, it ignored and downplayed all the evidence that both treatments are not safe, even when the evidence was produced by a British university. In conclusion, the studies used by the report do not provide any evidence that CBT and GET are safe and effective. Consequently, the report and the studies do not provide any support for the recommendation to use CBT and GET for ME/CFS or long COVID, which, in many cases, is the same or resembles ME/CFS, after an infection with SARS-CoV-2.

The Incidence of Long-Term Fatigue in Patients Who Achieved Remission From COVID-19 at King Abdulaziz Medical City

Introduction Long-term fatigue is a common condition that involves both physical and psychiatric symptoms, and it affects multiple age groups and causes morbidity and disabling symptoms that range from mild to severe symptoms. Many patients are discharged following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection without proper follow-up and evaluation of long-term effects, resulting in the improper treatment of the long-term symptoms, which increases the burden on the patients and healthcare systems. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a disease caused by the novel SARS-CoV-2. It results in a variety of symptoms, including fever, cough, respiratory distress, the loss of the sense of smell and taste, and long-term effects such as post-severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which is characterized by chronic fatigue, sleep disturbances, myalgia, weakness, and depression. The aim of this study is to assess the incidence of long-term fatigue in patients who achieved remission from COVID-19 at King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC), National Guards Health Affairs, Riyadh. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, non-probability convenience sampling study. All participants who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and achieved remission were approached in an outpatient department (OPD) setting and signed an informed consent form and were evaluated by standard questionnaires at clinics after remission from COVID-19 at King Abdulaziz Medical City in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. A total of 343 subjects who fit the inclusion criteria of any patients who have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and achieved remission were included in the study. This study included patients from the National Guard Hospital, students, and staff members. The primary outcome variable was the incidence of long-term fatigue in patients who achieved remission from COVID-19 as measured by the Chalder fatigue scale (CFQ). The participants were approached in clinics and general OPD by one of the research teams. Results Based on the study design, 343 patients were selected from King Abdulaziz Medical City in Riyadh, the incidence of long-term fatigue in patients who achieved remission from COVID-19 was 55.7%, and the rest were normal (44.3%). The incidence of long-term fatigue was statistically significantly higher in females and those who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 and achieved remission for more than two months. The age of the participants ranged from 18 to more than 45, with a predominance of females (60.6%). Regarding body mass index (BMI), 39.9% were overweight, and 29.2% were obese. Additionally, the incidence of patients with associated chronic disease was 27.4%; among these chronic diseases, hypertension was the most common one (18.1%), followed by diabetes (17%) and thyroid diseases (14.9%). Conclusion To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the few studies that were carried out in Saudi Arabia that assess long-term fatigue post COVID-19 infection. In our study, we discovered that long-term fatigue was highly prevalent (55.7%). We found that among those participants, more than half of those who reported chronic fatigue had a COVID-19 diagnosis for longer than two months. Furthermore, females made up the majority of those who had long-term fatigue. We urge that additional longitudinal and standardized studies be carried out in order to thoroughly determine the severity of long-term fatigue in patients who obtained remission from COVID-19.

The Updated NICE Guidance Exposed the Serious Flaws in CBT and Graded Exercise Therapy Trials for ME/CFS

The British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recently published its updated guidelines for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). NICE concluded, after an extensive review of the literature, that graded exercise therapy (GET) is harmful and should not be used, and that cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is only an adjunctive and not a curative treatment. Leading proponents of the cognitive behavioural model (CBmodel) find it difficult to accept this paradigm shift. In, for example, an article in The Lancet, they try to argue that the new NICE guideline is based on ideology instead of science. In this article we reviewed the evidence they used to support their claims. Our analysis shows that the trials they used in support suffered from serious flaws which included badly designed control groups, relying on subjective primary outcomes in non-blinded studies, including patients in their trials who didn't have the disease under investigation or had a self-limiting disease, selective reporting, outcome switching and making extensive endpoint changes, which created an overlap in entry and recovery criteria, using a post-hoc definition of recovery which included the severely ill, not publishing results that contradict their own conclusion, ignoring their own (objective) null effect, etc. The flaws in these trials all created a bias in favour of the interventions. Despite all these flaws, treatments that are said to lead to recovery in reality do not lead to objective improvement. Therefore, these studies do not support the claim that CBT and GET are effective treatments. Moreover, the arguments that are used to claim that NICE was wrong, in reality, highlight the absence of evidence for the safety and efficacy of CBT and GET and strengthen the decision by NICE to drop CBT and GET as curative treatments for ME/CFS.

Is It Useful to Question the Recovery Behaviour of Patients with ME/CFS or Long COVID?

For the last few decades, medical guidelines have recommended treating patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) with graded exercise therapy (GET) and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). Moreover, doctors have questioned the recovery behaviour of these patients and stimulated them to follow these treatments so that they would be able to go back to work. In this article, we reviewed trials of GET and CBT for ME/CFS that reported on work status before and after treatment to answer the question of whether doctors should continue to question the recovery behaviour of patients with ME/CFS. Our review shows that more patients are unable to work after treatment than before treatment with CBT and GET. It also highlights the fact that both treatments are unsafe for patients with ME/CFS. Therefore, questioning the recovery behaviour of patients with ME/CFS is pointless. This confirms the conclusion from the British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), which has recently published its updated ME/CFS guideline and concluded that CBT and GET are not effective and do not lead to recovery. Studies on CBT and GET for long COVID have not yet been published. However, this review offers no support for their use in improving the recovery of patients with an ME/CFS-like illness after infection with COVID-19, nor does it lend any support to the practice of questioning the recovery behaviour of these patients.

Some of the workforce face post COVID after the acute phase of the illness: The employer’s supportive role

BACKGROUND: A considerable proportion of workers that recover from an acute phase of COVID-19 are confronted with post COVID-19 symptoms of varying severity and duration. Employers have an important role in addressing this new condition. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review organisational practises that could help employees suffering from long COVID-19 return to work and to link these suggestions to theoretical frameworks from the field of work and organisational psychology. METHODS: Since scientific publications on post COVID-19 are published daily, but sound empirical studies are still scarce, the synthesis of the scientific and professional literature was performed in the form of a narrative review. RESULTS: The results were organised according to the healthy workplace model and explained through the lens of the job demands-resources theory. The role of the employer has three aspects: collaboration, instructional pillars, and key actors. The main guidelines for implementation of the policies are an individualised approach, flexibility, and support. Supportive policies, practises, and relationships might have a direct impact on workers’ psychological resources. CONCLUSIONS: The model could help employers understand the conditions and necessary adaptations for workers with post COVID-19, as well as advance research in work and organisational psychology.

Neuropsychological profiles and cerebral glucose metabolism in neurocognitive Long COVID-syndrome

During the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Long COVID-syndrome, which impairs patients through cognitive deficits, fatigue, and exhaustion, has become increasingly relevant. Its underlying pathophysiology, however, is unknown. In this study, we assessed cognitive profiles and regional cerebral glucose metabolism as a biomarker of neuronal function in outpatients suffering from long-term neurocognitive symptoms after COVID-19. Methods: Outpatients seeking neurological counseling with neurocognitive symptoms persisting for more than three months after polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed COVID-19 were included prospectively between June 16, 2020, and January 29, 2021. Patients (n = 31, 54±2.0 years) in the long-term phase after COVID-19 (202±58 days after positive PCR) were assessed with a neuropsychological test battery. Cerebral ¹⁸F-FDG PET imaging was performed in 14/31 patients. Results: Patients self-reported impaired attention, memory, and multitasking abilities (31/31), word-finding difficulties (27/31), and fatigue (24/31). Twelve of 31 patients could not return to the previous level of independence/employment. For all cognitive domains, average group results of the neuropsychological test-battery showed no impairment, but deficits (z-score<-1.5) were present on single-patient level mainly in the domain of visual memory (in 7/31; other domains ≤2/31). Mean MoCA performance (27/30 points) was above the cutoff-value for detection of cognitive impairment (< 26 points), although 9/31 patients performed slightly below this level (23-25 points). In the subgroup of patients who underwent ¹⁸F-FDG PET, we found no significant changes of regional cerebral glucose metabolism. Conclusion: Long COVID patients self-report uniform symptoms hampering their ability to work in a relevant fraction. However, cognitive testing showed minor impairments only on single-patient level approximately six months after the infection, whereas functional imaging revealed no distinct pathological changes. This clearly deviates from previous findings in subacute COVID-19 patients, suggesting that underlying neuronal causes are different and possibly related to the high prevalence of fatigue.

An Audit of UK Hospital Doctors' Knowledge and Experience of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis

Background and Objectives: There is some evidence that knowledge and understanding of ME among doctors is limited. Consequently, an audit study was carried out on a group of hospital doctors attending a training event to establish how much they knew about ME and their attitudes towards it. Materials and Methods: Participants at the training event were asked to complete a questionnaire, enquiring about prior knowledge and experience of ME and their approaches to diagnosis and treatment. A total of 44 completed questionnaires were returned. Responses were tabulated, proportions selecting available options determined, 95% confidence limits calculated, and the significance of associations determined by Fisher's exact test. Results: Few respondents had any formal teaching on ME, though most had some experience of it. Few knew how to diagnose it and most lacked confidence in managing it. None of the respondents who had had teaching or prior experience of ME considered it a purely physical illness. Overall, 82% of participants believed ME was at least in part psychological. Most participants responded correctly to a series of propositions about the general epidemiology and chronicity of ME. There was little knowledge of definitions of ME, diagnosis, or of clinical manifestations. Understanding about appropriate management was very deficient. Similarly, there was little appreciation of the impact of the disease on daily living or quality of life. Where some doctors expressed confidence diagnosing or managing ME, this was misplaced as they were incorrect on the nature of ME, its diagnostic criteria and its treatment. Conclusion: This audit demonstrates that most doctors lack training and clinical expertise in ME. Nevertheless, participants recognised a need for further training and indicated a wish to participate in this. It is strongly recommended that factually correct and up-to-date medical education on ME be made a priority at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. It is also recommended that this audit be repeated following a period of medical education.

The Role of Prevention in Reducing the Economic Impact of ME/CFS in Europe: A Report from the Socioeconomics Working Group of the European Network on ME/CFS (EUROMENE)

This report addresses the extent to which there may be scope for preventive programmes for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), and, if so, what economic benefits may accrue from the implementation of such programmes. We consider the economic case for prevention programmes, whether there is scope for preventive programmes for ME/CFS, and what are the health and economic benefits to be derived from the implementation of such programmes. We conclude that there is little scope for primary prevention programmes, given that ME/CFS is attributable to a combination of host and environmental risk factors, with host factors appearing to be most prominent, and that there are few identified modifiable risk factors that could be the focus of such programmes. The exception is in the use of agricultural chemicals, particularly organophosphates, where there is scope for intervention, and where Europe-wide programmes of health education to encourage safe use would be beneficial. There is a need for more research on risk factors for ME/CFS to establish a basis for the development of primary prevention programmes, particularly in respect of occupational risk factors. Secondary prevention offers the greatest scope for intervention, to minimise diagnostic delays associated with prolonged illness, increased severity, and increased costs.

Graded exercise therapy does not restore the ability to work in ME/CFS - Rethinking of a Cochrane review

BACKGROUND

Cochrane recently amended its exercise review for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) in response to an official complaint.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the amended review has addressed the concerns raised about the previous review and if exercise is an effective treatment that restores the ability to work in ME/CFS.

METHOD

The authors reviewed the amended Cochrane exercise review and the eight trials in it by paying particular interest to the objective outcomes. We also summarised the recently published review of work rehabilitation and medical retirement for ME/CFS.

RESULTS

The Cochrane review concluded that graded exercise therapy (GET) improves fatigue at the end of treatment compared to no-treatment. However, the review did not consider the unreliability of subjective outcomes in non-blinded trials, the objective outcomes which showed that GET is not effective, or the serious flaws of the studies included in the review. These flaws included badly matched control groups, relying on an unreliable fatigue instrument as primary outcome, outcome switching, p-hacking, ignoring evidence of harms, etc. The review did also not take into account that GET does not restore the ability to work.

CONCLUSION

GET not only fails to objectively improve function significantly or to restore the ability to work, but it is also detrimental to the health of≥50% of patients, according to a multitude of patient surveys. Consequently, it should not be recommended.

The draft updated NICE guidance for ME/CFS highlights the unreliability of subjective outcome measures in non-blinded trials

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recently published its draft updated guideline on the diagnosis and management of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). NICE concluded that ME/CFS is a complex multisystem chronic medical condition for which graded exercise therapy should not be used and cognitive behavioural therapy is only a supportive therapy and not a treatment or cure. The draft guidance also highlighted the unreliability of subjective outcome measures in non-blinded trials. High quality randomised controlled ME/CFS trials are now needed to find pharmacological treatments that lead to substantial objective improvement and restore the ability to work.

Could Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Be an Effective Treatment for Long COVID and Post COVID-19 Fatigue Syndrome? Lessons from the Qure Study for Q-Fever Fatigue Syndrome

An increasing number of young and previously fit and healthy people who did not require hospitalisation continue to have symptoms months after mild cases of COVID-19. Rehabilitation clinics are already offering cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) as an effective treatment for long COVID and post-COVID-19 fatigue syndrome based on the claims that it is effective for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS)-the most common post-infectious syndrome-as no study into the efficacy of CBT for post-COVID-19 fatigue syndrome has been published. Re-analyses of these studies, however, showed that CBT did not lead to objective improvements in heterogeneous groups of ME/CFS patients, nor did it restore the ability to work. The group of patients with long COVID and post-COVID-19 fatigue syndrome, on the other hand, is homogeneous. We therefore analysed the Dutch Qure study, as it studied the efficacy of CBT in a homogeneous group of patients who developed Q-fever fatigue syndrome-which affects up to 30% of patients-after the largest reported outbreak of Q-fever, to see if CBT might potentially be an effective treatment for long-haulers after COVID-19 infection. Our reanalysis found that the Qure study suffered from many serious methodological problems, which included relying on one subjective primary outcome in a study without a control group for the non-blinded CBT treatment group, using a post hoc definition of improvement, waiting 2 years before publishing their objective actometer results and ignoring the null effect of said results. Moreover, only 10% of participants achieved a clinically meaningful subjective improvement in fatigue as a result of CBT according to the study's own figures. Consequently, CBT has no subjective clinically meaningful effect in nine out of every ten patients that are treated with it. Additionally, the subjective improvement in fatigue was not matched by an improvement in disability, even though the disability was fatigue related according to the researchers. On top of this, CBT did not lead to an objective improvement in physical performance. Therefore, it cannot be said that CBT is an effective treatment for Q-fever fatigue syndrome either. It seems therefore unlikely that CBT will reduce disability or lead to objective improvement in long COVID or in post-COVID-19 fatigue syndrome.

Persistent fatigue following SARS-CoV-2 infection is common and independent of severity of initial infection

Fatigue is a common symptom in those presenting with symptomatic COVID-19 infection. However, it is unknown if COVID-19 results in persistent fatigue in those recovered from acute infection. We examined the prevalence of fatigue in individuals recovered from the acute phase of COVID-19 illness using the Chalder Fatigue Score (CFQ-11). We further examined potential predictors of fatigue following COVID-19 infection, evaluating indicators of COVID-19 severity, markers of peripheral immune activation and circulating pro-inflammatory cytokines. Of 128 participants (49.5 ± 15 years; 54% female), more than half reported persistent fatigue (67/128; 52.3%) at median of 10 weeks after initial COVID-19 symptoms. There was no association between COVID-19 severity (need for inpatient admission, supplemental oxygen or critical care) and fatigue following COVID-19. Additionally, there was no association between routine laboratory markers of inflammation and cell turnover (leukocyte, neutrophil or lymphocyte counts, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, lactate dehydrogenase, C-reactive protein) or pro-inflammatory molecules (IL-6 or sCD25) and fatigue post COVID-19. Female gender and those with a pre-existing diagnosis of depression/anxiety were over-represented in those with fatigue. Our findings demonstrate a significant burden of post-viral fatigue in individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection after the acute phase of COVID-19 illness. This study highlights the importance of assessing those recovering from COVID-19 for symptoms of severe fatigue, irrespective of severity of initial illness, and may identify a group worthy of further study and early intervention.

Well-Being at Work after Return to Work (RTW): A Systematic Review

Background: Employees’ well-being at work after the return to work (RTW) is considered a key aspect of rehabilitation and maintenance of workability. This systematic review aimed at identifying the common psychosocial factors that predict the subjective and psychological well-being in RTW processes after having a long-standing health problem or disability. Objective: To evaluate the subjective and psychological well-being at work of employees with chronic or long-standing health problems or those returning to work after any cause of disability. Data source: Systematic review of articles published in English or Spanish using PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, MEDLINE, Psychology, and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and Pubpsych. An additional study was identified by contacting expert academics in the field. The search equations used included terms such as Return to Work, Long-Standing Health Problems or Disability, Work Health Balance, and job satisfaction or subjective well-being. Eligibility criteria for the studies: Studies that included a measure of employees’ well-being at work following return to work were selected for the review. Evaluation of the studies and synthesis methods: The studies were selected using predefined fields which included quality criteria. Results: Of the 264 articles returned by the initial search, a total of 20 were finally selected. Results were organized around the three different theoretical approaches for understanding RTW and its antecedents and consequences: (a) RTW and autonomy at work have a positive effect on psychological well-being; (b) job demand is linked to less job satisfaction, whereas a higher level on the work–health balance is associated with job satisfaction and work engagement; (c) internal and external support is linked to job satisfaction in the case of a disease. Limitations: The evidence provided by the results is restricted by the limited availability of studies focusing on well-being at work following return to work. Moreover, the studies identified are of different kinds, thereby preventing comparisons. Conclusions and implications of the main findings: Employees’ subjective well-being after return to work has received very little attention to date. Given its importance in the current configuration of the labor market, it should be the object of more research.

Biomedical Insights that Inform the Diagnosis of ME/CFS

It is well known that myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) [...].