Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Zosia Kmietowicz A review which found that exercise and cognitive behaviour therapy
are the most effective treatments for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is
likely to split even further the two camps of patients, carers, and
doctors who strongly disagree about the cause of the condition.
Simon Wessely, professor of epidemiological psychiatry at King's
College, London,described the review as a "reasonable step forward
that can help many people." But he added that the majority of the
chronic fatigue syndrome community does not believe in the type of
approach that was found to be the most helpful treatment option and
would try to discredit the research.
The review was conducted by two independent teams Overall, cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy
(GET) showed the most promising results. Immunoglobulin and
hydrocortisone showed some limited effects, but no definite conclusions
could be drawn about them.
Professor Wessely expressed anger at the level of publicity the
research has attracted, and said it would further damage the public's
prejudice towards people with chronic fatigue. "If this review was
about fatigue following treatment for cancer it would not be
controversial, but because it is chronic fatigue it's a different
story," he said.
In an editorial accompanying the review, Professor Wessely wrote: "It
is regrettable but likely that this review article will not be
universally welcomed. Some consumers, and researchers alike, will make
it their mission to discredit the authors and their conclusions. Others
may see the findings, especially related to the benefits of CBT, as
confirming their prejudices as to the mental instability of patients
with CFS."
He added that "such views are misguided" but widespread among the
public, health professionals and employers.
Rather than argue about the cause of the condition the chronic fatigue
syndrome community should, Professor Wessely said, build on the
research by cooperating to perform more rigorous studies with more
valid outcome measures than those used in the past.
"Despite years of trying we do not seem to be able to move away from
the controversy that surrounds CFS and I have become depressed and
despondent about the whole issue," he said. "People who have tried
CBT and GET have high levels of satisfaction, but their availability
within the NHS is pathetic and shameful."
Patient groups and clinicians should put aside their differences to try
and improve the situation for the patients, he added.
one from the NHS
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at the University of York and
another from the San Antonio Evidence-based Practice Center at the
University of Texas Health Science Center. It looked at 44 trials that
included a total of 2800 patients (JAMA 2001;286:1360-8).
Read all Rapid Responses
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+