Volunteer opportunity: Organizing Phoenix Rising articles
This section contains all the articles that have been published by Phoenix Rising over the years. As you will see if you browse here, some of the articles are outdated--either the research has been superseded or retracted or the article features an event or campaign that is now in...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Factors influencing engagement of patients in a novel intervention for CFS/ME (FINE?)

Discussion in 'Latest ME/CFS Research' started by oceanblue, Aug 26, 2011.

  1. oceanblue

    oceanblue Guest

    I'm a bit puzzled by this paper as it is about Pragmatic Rehabilitation therapy and from the FINE trial team - who, I thought, had demonstrated that this therapy didn't work.

    Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2011 Apr;12(2):112-22.
    Factors influencing engagement of patients in a novel intervention for CFS/ME: a qualitative study.
    Chew-Graham C, Brooks J, Wearden A, Dowrick C, Peters S.

    Source: School of Community-Based Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. cchew@manchester.ac.uk


    To establish what factors are important for patients to engage in a new intervention for chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) and make recommendations to general practitioners (GPs) on preparing a patient for referral to such a service.

    NICE guidelines recommend a prominent role for primary care in the management of patients with CFS/ME, with prompt diagnosis and appropriate referral for evidence-based treatments.

    A qualitative study nested within a multi-centre randomised controlled trial of two new nurse therapist delivered interventions. Semi-structured interviews carried out with 19 patients who had received pragmatic rehabilitation (PR) in the trial. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and an iterative approach used to develop themes from the data set.

    Factors that influence whether or not a patient engages with PR for CFS/ME are ensuring that the patient feels accepted and believed, that they accept the diagnosis, and that the model implicated by the treatment offered to the patient matches the model of illness held by the patient. If patients hold a clearly incompatible model of their illness, it is unlikely that they will engage with, and successfully complete, therapy. It is vital that the GP elicits and explores such illness beliefs either before making a referral to maximise patient engagement in therapy, or that an initial session with the therapist explores attitudes to the treatment model offered and then works with the patient's model.
  2. In Vitro Infidelium

    In Vitro Infidelium Guest

    Translation - this study explains why our failure to demonstrate in a previous study (cost 1million) that our recommended (cough "hypothesised as valid") treatment has any value to patients, was the fault of GPs who referred patients who couldn't be persuaded that our treatment works. GPs should only send patients for treatment who are bullyable, naieve and/or unassertive.

    Given that this comes from a "School of Community-Based Medicine", it bears useful comparison with the recent excellent article by Jason - who actualy identifies 'community' as something real and in which ptients are empowered not merely 'managed'.

  3. Enid

    Enid Senior Member

    What a waste of time and money - nothing more constructive to do ? Has common sense completely escaped some in the medical world.
  4. fla

    fla Senior Member

    Montreal, Canada
    If a therapy is nothing more than a placebo then it follows that belief in the therapy is critical or no benefit will be obtained.
  5. biophile

    biophile Places I'd rather be.

    Didn't they blow over a million pounds on the FINE Trial? I noted at the time that the failure of the FINE Trial was reworded to make it appear that the problem was not enough sessions were done and the therapists involved weren't specialized enough so more research is needed. At some stage they probably also thought, "let's just milk out more papers anyway".

    In other words, factors that influence patients' agreement is that they are in agreement. Another "No Shit Sherlock" paper?

    Could this have negative implications for those naughty recalcitrant patients who don't buy into Pragmatic Rehabilitation?
  6. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Actually it was 1.3+ million in the end (initially it was going to be 1.1m).

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page