Defining recovery in chronic fatigue syndrome: a critical review.

PURPOSE: In chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), the lack of consensus on how recovery should be defined or interpreted has generated controversy and confusion. The purpose of this paper was to systematically review, compare, and evaluate the definitions of recovery reported in the CFS literature and to make recommendations about the scope of recovery assessments. METHODS: A search was done using the MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases for peer review papers that contained the search terms "chronic fatigue syndrome" and "recovery," "reversal," "remission," and/or "treatment response." RESULTS: From the 22 extracted studies, recovery was operationally defined by reference with one or more of these domains: (1) pre-morbid functioning; (2) both fatigue and function; (3) fatigue (or related symptoms) alone; (4) function alone; and/or (5) brief global assessment. Almost all of the studies measuring recovery in CFS did so differently. The brief global assessment was the most common outcome measure used to define recovery. Estimates of recovery ranged from 0 to 66 % in intervention studies and 2.6 to 62 % in naturalistic studies. CONCLUSIONS: Given that the term "recovery" was often based on limited assessments and less than full restoration of health, other more precise and accurate labels (e.g., clinically significant improvement) may be more appropriate and informative. In keeping with common understandings of the term recovery, we recommend a consistent definition that captures a broad-based return to health with assessments of both fatigue and function as well as the patient's perceptions of his/her recovery status.

Chronic fatigue self-management in primary care: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of brief fatigue self-management (FSM) for medically unexplained chronic fatigue (UCF) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) in primary care. METHODS: A randomized controlled design was used wherein 111 patients with UCF or CFS were randomly assigned to two sessions of FSM, two sessions of symptom monitoring support (attention control; AC), or a usual care control condition (UC). Participants were assessed at baseline and at 3 and 12 months after treatment. The primary outcome, the Fatigue Severity Scale, measured fatigue impact on functioning. Analysis was by intention to treat (multiple imputation) and also by per protocol. RESULTS: A group × time interaction across the 15-month trial showed significantly greater reductions in fatigue impact in the FSM group in comparison with the AC group (p < .023) and the UC group (p < .013). Medium effect sizes for reduced fatigue impact in the FSM group were found in comparison with the AC group (d = 0.46) and the UC group (d = 0.40). The per-protocol analysis revealed large effect sizes for the same comparisons. Clinically significant decreases in fatigue impact were found for 53% of participants in the FSM condition, 14% in the AC condition, and 17% in the UC condition. Dropout rates at the 12-month follow-up were high (42%-53%), perhaps attributable to the burden of monthly telephone calls to assess health care use. CONCLUSION: A brief self-management intervention for patients with UCF or CFS seemed to be clinically effective for reducing the impact of fatigue on functioning. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00997451.