There's no abstract for this.
However, I don't think this is that amazing: if one looked at people who had no therapy and were being classed as recovered (or much improved), they likely would also have much better pain scores than a group that had rated themselves less well by other measures.
Pain Med. 2013 Sep;14(9):1435-8. doi: 10.1111/pme.12181. Epub 2013 Jun 26.
Functional improvement is accompanied by reduced pain in adolescent chronic fatigue syndrome.
Nijhof SL1, Priesterbach LP, Bleijenberg G, Engelbert RH, van de Putte EM.
Author information
1Department of Pediatrics, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht.
So they've combined the two arms of the FITNET trial (although didn't use all the people in the control group)All participants in this pain study were treated with CBT, either internet-based (55 of 72 of the participating patients) or face to face
Group analyses were performed on the basis of whether the adolescents had recovered (yes/no) from CFS at 12-month follow-up. Recovery from CFS was defined, in relation to healthy peers (2 standard deviation [SD]) in accordance with the FITNET trial as a combination of fatigue scores (CIS-20 fatigue scale <40), physical functioning (CHQ physical functioning scale 85%), school attendance within normal limits (>90%), and if the patient rates himself or herself as having recovered (SRI: “I have completely recovered” or “I feel much better”)
The pain scores (they use two measures) are certainly a lot better in the so-called "recovered" group:
Pain scores at baseline
Average pain threshold (0–11 kg)
Recovered: 5.8 (1.9)
Non-recovered: 5.7 (1.5)
p-value: 0.901
Mean Difference (95% CI) 0.1 (-0.7 to 0.9)
Adjusted Difference (95% CI)† 0.0 (-0.9 to 0.8)
Average DOP (score range 0–16)
Recovered: 5.0 (3.0)
Non-recovered: 6.5 (3.9)
p-value: 0.072
Mean Difference (95% CI) -1.5 (-3.2 to 0.1)
Adjusted Difference (95% CI)† -1.2 (-2.9 to 0.4)
Pain scores at 12-month follow-up
Average pain threshold (0–11 kg)
Recovered: 7.6 (2.3)
Non-recovered: 6.3 (2.3)
p-value: 0.019
Mean Difference (95% CI) 1.3 (0.2 to 2.4)
Adjusted Difference (95% CI)† 1.2 (0.2 to 2.2)
†
Adjusted for age, gender, anxiety, depression, average pain threshold at baseline, and average DOP at baseline
Average DOP (score range 0–16) .
Recovered: 2.0 (2.4)
Non-recovered: 5.8 (3.6)
p-value: <0.001
Mean Difference (95% CI) -3.8 (-5.2 to 2.3)
Adjusted Difference (95% CI)† -2.9 (-4.2 to 1.6)
† Adjusted for age, gender, anxiety, depression, average pain threshold at baseline, and average DOP at baseline
However, I don't think this is that amazing: if one looked at people who had no therapy and were being classed as recovered (or much improved), they likely would also have much better pain scores than a group that had rated themselves less well by other measures.
Last edited: