Journal: Psychol Med. 2012 Feb 21:1-11. [Epub ahead of print]
Tummers M, Knoop H, van Dam A, Bleijenberg G.
Expert Centre for Chronic Fatigue, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical
Centre, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is an
effective but intensive treatment, requiring trained therapists. A minimal
intervention based on CBT for CFS, guided self-instruction, was shown to be
an effective treatment when delivered in a tertiary treatment centre.
Implementing this intervention in a community-based mental health centre
(MHC) will increase the treatment capacity for CFS patients. This study
evaluated the effectiveness of guided self-instruction for CFS implemented
in an MHC, delivered by nurses.
Method
One hundred and twenty-three patients were randomly assigned to either
guided self-instruction (n=62) or a waiting list (n=61). Randomization was
computer generated, with allocation by numbered sealed envelopes. Group
allocation was open to all those involved. Patients fulfilled US Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria for CFS. Primary outcome
variables were fatigue severity and physical and social functioning,
measured with the Checklist Individual Strength (CIS) and the Medical
Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 (SF-36) respectively.
RESULTS:
After 6 months, patients who followed guided self-instruction reported a
significantly larger decrease in fatigue compared to the waiting list [mean
difference -8.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.8 to -12.4, controlled
effect size 0.70]. There was no significant difference in physical and
social functioning. However, post-hoc analyses showed a significant decrease
in fatigue and physical disabilities following the intervention in a
subgroup of patients with physical disabilities at baseline (SF-36 physical
functioning ⩽70).
CONCLUSIONS:
Implementation of guided self-instruction in a community-based MHC was
partially successful. The minimal intervention can be effectively
implemented for CFS patients with physical impairments.
PMID: 22354999 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
(Ik hoef verder niks te zeggen, dacht ik zo.)
Nijmegen weer in de bocht......
Moderator: Moderators
- FreeSpirit
- Beginner
- Berichten: 33
- Lid geworden op: 13 okt 2005, 11:11
Nijmegen weer in de bocht......
Er is geen significant verschil in fysiek en sociaal functioneren tussen de beide groepen. Het maakt dus niet uit of je 6 maanden een behandeling hebt gehad, of dat je op de wachtlijst stond. Wat heb je er dan aan? Niets, nada, njente...
Nijmegen weer in de bocht......
Er was geen verbetering, maar die werd wel ervaren in het kort samengevat?
-
- Gevorderd lid
- Berichten: 536
- Lid geworden op: 27 nov 2010, 10:15
Nijmegen weer in de bocht......
Er was wel verbetering in fysiek en sociaal functioneren, maar alleen in een subgroep.solstice schreef:Er was geen verbetering, maar die werd wel ervaren in het kort samengevat?
Nijmegen weer in de bocht......
Vraag ik me wel af hoe groot die subgroep is, en wat die subgroep een subgroep maakt. Waarom ze dus niet bij de gewone groep worden gerekend...