ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Effective treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) with cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) relies on a correct classification of so called 'fluctuating active' versus 'passive' patients. For successful treatment with CBT is it especially important to recognise the passive patients and give them a tailored treatment protocol. In the present study it was evaluated whether CFS patient's physical activity pattern can be assessed most accurately with the 'Activity Pattern Interview' (API), the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) or the CFS-Activity Questionnaire (CFS-AQ). METHODS: The three instruments were validated compared to actometers. Actometers are until now the best and most objective instrument to measure physical activity, but they are too expensive and time consuming for most clinical practice settings. In total 226 CFS patients enrolled for CBT therapy answered the API at intake and filled in the two questionnaires. Directly after intake they wore the actometer for two weeks. Based on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves the validity of the three methods were assessed and compared. RESULTS: Both the API and the two questionnaires had an acceptable validity (0.64 to 0.71). None of the three instruments was significantly better than the others. The proportion of false predictions was rather high for all three instrument. The IPAQ had the highest proportion of correct passive predictions (sensitivity 70.1%). CONCLUSION: The validity of all three instruments appeared to be fair, and all showed rather high proportions of false classifications. Hence in fact none of the tested instruments could really be called satisfactory. Because the IPAQ showed to be the best in correctly predicting 'passive' CFS patients, which is most essentially related to treatment results, it was concluded that the IPAQ is the preferable alternative for an actometer when treating CFS patients in clinical practice.
Subject(s)
Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic , Interviews as Topic , Motor Activity , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cognitive Behavioral Therapy , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic/physiopathology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Monitoring, Physiologic/instrumentation , ROC Curve , Reproducibility of Results , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study investigated the costs and outcomes of implementing cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) in a mental health center (MHC). CBT is an evidence-based treatment for CFS that was scarcely available until now. To investigate the possibilities for wider implementation, a pilot implementation project was set up. METHOD: Costs and effects were evaluated in a non-controlled before- and after study with an eight months time-horizon. Both the costs of performing the treatments and the costs of implementing the treatment program were included in the analysis. The implementation interventions included: informing general practitioners (GPs) and CFS patients, training therapists, and instructing the MHC employees. Given the non-controlled design, cost outcome ratios (CORs) and their acceptability curves were analyzed. Analyses were done from a health care perspective and from a societal perspective. Bootstrap analyses were performed to estimate the uncertainty around the cost and outcome results. RESULTS: 125 CFS patients were included in the study. After treatment 37% had recovered from CFS and the mean gained QALY was 0.03. Costs of patients' health care and productivity losses had decreased significantly. From the societal perspective the implementation led to cost savings and to higher health states for patients, indicating dominancy. From the health care perspective the implementation revealed overall costs of 5.320 euros per recovered patient, with an acceptability curve showing a 100% probability for a positive COR at a willingness to pay threshold of 6.500 euros per recovered patient. CONCLUSION: Implementing CBT for CFS in a MHC appeared to have a favorable cost outcome ratio (COR) from a societal perspective. From a health care perspective the COR depended on how much a recovered CFS patient is being valued. The strength of the evidence was limited by the non-controlled design. The outcomes of this study might facilitate health care providers when confronted with the decision whether or not to adopt CBT for CFS in their institution.
Subject(s)
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy/economics , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic/therapy , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Mental Health Services/economics , Cognitive Behavioral Therapy/organization & administration , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic/economics , Female , Humans , Male , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is associated with a high use of health care services. To reduce the related costs for patients and society, it will be useful to know which factors determine CFS patients' amount of health care use. Little is known, however, about these factors. METHOD: The present study retrospectively performed a cross-sectional analysis to investigate the possible factors determining CFS patients' health care use. A total of 263 CFS patients, derived from two subgroups (149 from tertiary care and 114 from primary/secondary care), participated. Health care use was measured with a questionnaire asking details on consumption over the past 6 months. Fatigue severity and physical functioning were measured with the subscale Experienced Fatigue of the Checklist Individual Strength (CIS-20) and the subscale Physical Functioning of the SF-36, respectively. Multiple regression analysis, T-tests, and chi(2) tests were performed. RESULTS: The regression analysis revealed that, after controlling for patient characteristics (explaining 13%), fatigue factors added 4% predictive value and certain perpetuating factors of fatigue, including focus on bodily symptoms and attributions of fatigue, added another 5%. The analysis of subgroups revealed that, compared to the tertiary care population, fewer patients from primary/secondary care had visited a medical specialist (50% vs. 71%), used antidepressants (16% vs. 25%) and tranquilizers (3% vs. 18%), and had spent a night in hospital (7% vs. 10%). However, overall costs of health care between these subgroups did not differ. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that illness duration, physical impairment due to fatigue, and psychological perpetuating factors of fatigue do determine the variance in CFS patients' health care use. These results give clear directions for treating CFS patients and managing health care for CFS.
Subject(s)
Cross-Sectional Studies , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic/epidemiology , Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Utilization , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic/diagnosis , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic/economics , Female , Fibromyalgia/diagnosis , Fibromyalgia/economics , Fibromyalgia/epidemiology , Health Care Costs , Health Services/economics , Health Services Research/statistics & numerical data , Health Status , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Personality Inventory/statistics & numerical data , Physical Fitness/physiology , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Psychometrics , Quality of Life/psychology , Regression Analysis , Sleep Wake Disorders , Surveys and Questionnaires , Tranquilizing Agents/therapeutic useABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the success of implementing cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) in a representative clinical practice setting and compared the patient outcomes with those of previously published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CBT for CFS. METHOD: The implementation interventions were the following: spreading information about the new treatment setting to general practitioners and CFS patients; training mental health center (MHC) therapists in CBT for CFS; and organizing changes in the MHC patient workflow. Patient outcomes were documented with validated self-report measures of fatigue and physical functioning before and after treatment. The comparison of the treatment results with RCT results was done following the benchmark strategy. RESULTS: One-hundred forty-three CFS patients were referred to the MHC, of whom 112 started treatment. The implementation was largely successful, but a weak point was the fact that 32% of all referred patients dropped out shortly after or even before starting treatment. Treatment effect sizes were in the range of those found in the benchmark studies. CONCLUSIONS: CBT for CFS can successfully be implemented in an MHC. Treatment results were acceptable, but the relatively large early dropout of patients needs attention.
Subject(s)
Benchmarking , Cognitive Behavioral Therapy/standards , Community Mental Health Centers , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic/rehabilitation , Activities of Daily Living/psychology , Adult , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic/psychology , Female , Health Plan Implementation , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/standards , Patient Dropouts , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Rehabilitation, VocationalABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the impact of an informational intervention among general practitioners (GPs) about a new treatment with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) in a mental health center (MHC). The outcome measures concerned GPs knowledge and attitudes towards CFS and their actual referrals of CFS patients to this new treatment setting. METHODS: Three hundred and one GPs, who all had received written information about CFS four times, and who partly had also visited an informational group session, completed a short questionnaire survey on CFS knowledge and attitudes. Referral data were obtained from the mental health center. RESULTS: During 16 months 22% of all GPs in the concerning region had referred at least one CFS patient. Concerning knowledge and attitude, the survey results showed that 70% of the GPs had remembered the intervention's main message, namely the new treatment possibility. These informed GPs reported better knowledge and more positive attitudes towards CFS than the non-informed GPs, who had not seen and read the intervention's information. CONCLUSION: This study showed that disseminating written materials can be a useful method for stimulating GPs to refer CFS patients for CBT. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: In future implementation projects concerning CBT for CFS (or other 'new' treatments for a disputed illness) in a MHC or other institution, the informational intervention evaluated here can be a suitable and efficient method to inform GPs and let them refer patients.