• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Investigation of suspected chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalopathy

Kyla

ᴀɴɴɪᴇ ɢꜱᴀᴍᴩᴇʟ
Messages
721
Location
Canada
http://tidsskriftet.no/article/3447861/en_GB
(open access)

Investigation of suspected chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalopathy
J F Owe H Næss I O Gjerde J E Bødtker O-B Tysnes 
BACKGROUND Chronic fatigue is a frequently occurring problem in both the primary and specialist health services. The Department of Neurology at Haukeland University Hospital has established a standard assessment for patients referred with suspected CFS/ME. This study reports diagnoses and findings upon assessment, and considers the benefit of supplementary examinations.

MATERIAL AND METHOD Diagnoses and findings from examinations of 365 patients assessed for suspected CFS/ME are retrospectively reported.

RESULTS A total of 48 patients (13.2 %) were diagnosed with CFS/ME, while a further 18 patients (4.9 %) were diagnosed with post-infectious fatigue. Mental and behavioural disorders were diagnosed in 169 patients (46.3 %), and these represented by far the largest group. Serious, but unrecognised somatic illness was discovered in two patients, while changes of uncertain significance were identified by MRI and lumbar puncture in a few patients.

INTERPRETATION Fatigue is a frequently occurring symptom in the population. Thorough somatic and psychiatric investigation is necessary before referral to the specialist health services. Mental disorders and reactions to life crises are common and important differential diagnoses for CFS/ME. Long waiting times in the specialist health services may result in delayed diagnosis for these patients.
 

Scarecrow

Revolting Peasant
Messages
1,904
Location
Scotland
A crucial factor for the low rate of diagnosed was that the Canadian criteria were used. Estimated 0.1% of the general population versus 2.5-3.0% for Fukuda.
Fukuda is generally estimated to be 0.2 to 0.4% , I think. The empirical definition is about 2.5%

What clinical criteria are generally used in Norway?
 

deleder2k

Senior Member
Messages
1,129
A total of 48 patients (13.2 %) were diagnosed with CFS/ME,

I consider that as a pretty low number. If the Fukuda/Oxford criteria were used this number would be a lot higher.

@Scarecrow, The Norwegian Health Directorate recommends Canadian criteria for adults, but it is only a recommendation.

This one is interesting:

F5.large.jpg
Source: http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/4/2/e003973.full
 

jimells

Senior Member
Messages
2,009
Location
northern Maine
Was this study based on one clinic, or one assessment technique used in multiple clinics? It would be really interesting to know the overall "success" rate vs. other clinics, i.e., what percentage of everybody coming through the door is able to resume "normal" life - the outcome measure that matters most.
 

deleder2k

Senior Member
Messages
1,129
Was this study based on one clinic, or one assessment technique used in multiple clinics? It would be really interesting to know the overall "success" rate vs. other clinics, i.e., what percentage of everybody coming through the door is able to resume "normal" life - the outcome measure that matters most.

It was only at one clinic. Canadian criteria was used.

I think there is a study from the same department at Haukeland, but the CDC criteria was used:


... meeting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) case definition

They looked at "follow-up of employment status in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome after mononucleosis"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4248085/
 
Last edited:

jimells

Senior Member
Messages
2,009
Location
northern Maine
Nyland et al said:
Longitudinal follow-up of employment status in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome after mononucleosis

Results
Of 111 patients at contact 1, 92 (83%) patients returned the questionnaire at contact 2. Mean disease duration at contact 1 was 4.7 years and at contact 2 11.4 years. At contact 1, 9 (10%) were part-time or full-time employed. At contact 2, 49 (55%) were part-time or full-time employed.

Conclusions

About half of younger patients with CFS with long-term incapacity for work experienced marked improvement including full-time or part-time employment showing better outcomes than expected.

Strengths and limitations of this study
  • Two strengths of the study are very long prospective follow-up period and focus on employment.
  • A limitation is that patients were recruited from a tertiary centre.
  • Long-term prognosis for young patients with chronic fatigue syndrome after mononucleosis is favourable for a large subgroup.
  • More than half of the patients with long-term incapacity for work are re-employed after mean disease duration of 11.4 years.
  • Factors associated with poor long-term prognosis include depression, arthralgia and disease duration.

I'm not qualified to judge if the study is robust or not, but the numbers sure look better than anything from the PACE People. I recall several recent threads discussing the likely prognosis for patients, especially younger ones. This study should give a little hope to them, even while we are still limited to symptomatic relief. We must've discussed this study before, but of course I've forgotten.

@deleder2k thanks for posting this.
 

deleder2k

Senior Member
Messages
1,129
It should be noted that the results are only from patients that got ME from mono. Contact 2 was at 11.4 years. 55% working sounds really good, but remember that they may have held a 10% position, in a customised job.
 

Bob

Senior Member
Messages
16,455
Location
England (south coast)
Investigation of suspected chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalopathy
J.F. Owe, H. Næss, I.O. Gjerde, J.E. Bødtker, O-B. Tysnes

I think I might be very impressed with this study, with some reservations, but I'm not yet certain as there are a lot of details to analyse and reflect upon. It seems like quite a comprehensive investigation of the patients - they even had lumber punctures which suggested biomedical abnormalities in some cases, and MRI scans.

This could be a great paper to present to our own health service providers, to demonstrate the sort of initial investigations and delineation that should be carried out. Although I'm not sure how the list of biomedical investigations compares with recommendations by various ME/CFS advocates.

In addition to the 13.2% CCC patients, a further 4.9% were given a diagnosis of (ICD G93.3) post viral fatigue syndrome. A small number were diagnosed with fibromyagyia.

There were a further 12.9% (47) for which no specific diagnosis could be made, but some nonetheless had milder cases of fatigue and malaise but did not meet the CCC criteria and so were diagnosed with ICD R53 malaise and fatigue. (I guess these were what might be called cases of ideopathic chronic fatigue). Others had a suspected nervous system disorder and were diagnosed with ICD Z03.3:
"No specific diagnosis was made for 47 patients, who received symptom diagnoses such as R53 malaise and fatigue, or Z03.3 observation for suspected nervous system disorder. These were primarily patients with mild symptoms and no definitive somatic or mental illness, who did not fulfil the criteria for CFS/ME."

6% had 'burn out'.

Quite a large proportion of the patients were given a wide range of psychiatric diagnoses, which perhaps gives some insight into how ME/CFS has become a waste basket diagnosis, and why there's so much confusion and stigma associated with the illness. (i.e. ME/CFS is a common misdiagnosis for people with complex emotional needs who doctors might find challenging to give good care to.) e.g. A couple of the patients were victims of ongoing (domestic?) bullying and abuse.

There seems to be quite a lot of patients who were given functional/somatoform diagnoses, which I'd like more information about.

I'm not sure what to make of the following:
21.1% were diagnosed with somatoform disorders and
14.8% were diagnosed with F48 Neurasthenia.

I didn't think that 'neurasthenia' diagnosis was actually used in the modern era of medicine. I didn't think it meant anything other than fatigue caused by emotional distress, or something similarly vague.

So, many of the diagnoses were vague or undefined fatigue-related illnesses (e.g. somatoform, neurasthenia, ICD R53 fatigue), but did not conform to CCC.

It's an interesting and quite complex study.
 
Last edited:
Messages
3,263
I noticed that Wessely always finds higher rates than most researchers, no matter which criteria is used.
Hmmm. Is this what James Coyne calls the "puffer fish" phenomenon? Talk your research up by claiming that the problem affects more people than it does?

I notice there's a lot of this kind of big-talking in psychological medicine. You know, loads of patients have unexplained physical complaints, the problem is endemic, these annoying patients are up taking time and costing money - and we're the folks to help you out with it!
 

deleder2k

Senior Member
Messages
1,129
A doctor has commented in the article in Norwegian. He criticises that the Canadia criteria is used instead of Fukuda. The doctor points out that there is no evidence the use of it will help diagnose another disease than Fukuda (3)
He asks someone to explain to him what the difference of CFS/ME and postinfectious fatigue after PEM (lasting more than 6 months) is.

3. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Clinical guideline CG53. Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy): diagnosis and management. London, NICE, 2007. http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG53 (15.02.2016)