Putting the rest cure to rest—again

BMJ 1998; 316 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7134.796 (Published 14 March 1998)
Cite this as: BMJ 1998;316:796.1

Get access to this article and all of bmj.com for the next 14 days

Sign up for a 14 day free trial today

Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment. Please log in or subscribe below.

Rest has no place in treating chronic fatigue

  1. Michael Sharpe, Senior lecturer,
  2. Simon Wessely, Professor
  1. Edinburgh University Department of Psychiatry, Royal Edinburgh Hospital, Edinburgh EH10 5HF
  2. Academic Department of Psychological Medicine, King's College School of Medicine, London SE5 8AF

    “Go home and rest” is still the advice given to many patients who complain of chronic fatigue. The refrain is echoed in self help books and magazines and adopted by many patients. What are the origins of rest as a treatment, does it work, and what evidence is there on which to base our advice to patients?

    Chronic fatigue syndromes are not new.1 Victorian physicians diagnosed them as neurasthenia and routinely prescribed rest. This approach was typified by Silas Weir Mitchell's “rest cure,”2 which was so popular as to be described as “the greatest advance of which practical medicine can boast in the last quarter of the century.”3 Despite such accolades, the popularity of the rest cure was short lived. By the turn of the century the same private clinics that once provided it were changing to more active treatments and to the newer psychotherapies.1 The …

    Get access to this article and all of bmj.com for the next 14 days

    Sign up for a 14 day free trial today

    Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment. Please log in or subscribe below.

    Article access

    Article access for 1 day

    Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*

    The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record

    * Prices do not include VAT

    THIS WEEK'S POLL