Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20418251›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2010

Nurse led, home based self help treatment for patients in primary care with chronic fatigue syndrome: randomised controlled trial.

Alison J Wearden, Christopher Dowrick, Carolyn Chew-Graham, Richard P Bentall, Richard K Morriss, Sarah Peters, Lisa Riste, Gerry Richardson, Karina Lovell, Graham Dunn and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 121 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  7. Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. [Multimodal Treatment Strategies for Homebound Patients with Severe ME/CFS: A Scoping Review].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Alison J WeardenSchool of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester. alison.wearden@manchester.ac.uk
Christopher Dowrick
Carolyn Chew-Graham
Richard P Bentall
Richard K Morriss
Sarah Peters
Lisa Riste
Gerry Richardson
Karina Lovell
Graham Dunn
Fatigue Intervention by Nurses Evaluation (FINE) trial writing group and the FINE trial group
University of Manchester · GBBangor University · GBHull York Medical School · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

Department of HealthMedical Research Council G0200212Medical Research Council G200212
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of home delivered pragmatic rehabilitation-a programme of gradually increasing activity designed collaboratively by the patient and the therapist-and supportive listening-an approach based on non-directive counselling-for patients in primary care with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis or encephalitis (CFS/ME).

designSingle blind, randomised, controlled trial.

setting186 general practices across the north west of England between February 2005 and May 2007.

participants296 patients aged 18 or over with CFS/ME (median illness duration seven years) diagnosed using the Oxford criteria.

interventionsParticipants were randomly allocated to pragmatic rehabilitation, supportive listening, or general practitioner treatment as usual. Both therapies were delivered at home in 10 sessions over 18 weeks by one of three adult specialty general nurses who had received four months' training, including supervised practice, in each of the interventions. GP treatment as usual was unconstrained except that patients were not to be referred for systematic psychological therapies during the treatment period. Main outcome measures The primary clinical outcomes were fatigue and physical functioning at the end of treatment (20 weeks) and 70 weeks from recruitment compared with GP treatment as usual. Lower fatigue scores and higher physical functioning scores denote better outcomes.

resultsA total of 257 (87%) of the 296 patients who entered the trial were assessed at 70 weeks, the primary outcome point. Analysis was on an intention to treat basis, with robust treatment effects estimated after adjustment for missing data using probability weights. Immediately after treatment (at 20 weeks), patients allocated to pragmatic rehabilitation (n=95) had significantly improved fatigue (effect estimate -1.18, 95% confidence interval -2.18 to -0.18; P=0.021) but not physical functioning (-0.18, 95% CI -5.88 to +5.52; P=0.950) compared with patients allocated to treatment as usual (n=100). At one year after finishing treatment (70 weeks), there were no statistically significant differences in fatigue or physical functioning between patients allocated to pragmatic rehabilitation and those on treatment as usual (-1.00, 95% CI -2.10 to +0.11; P=0.076 and +2.57, 95% CI 3.90 to +9.03; P=0.435). At 20 weeks, patients allocated to supportive listening (n=101) had poorer physical functioning than those allocated to treatment as usual (-7.54, 95% CI -12.76 to -2.33; P=0.005) and no difference in fatigue. At 70 weeks, patients allocated to supportive listening did not differ significantly from those allocated to treatment as usual on either primary outcome.

conclusionsFor patients with CFS/ME in primary care, pragmatic rehabilitation delivered by trained nurse therapists improves fatigue in the short term compared with unconstrained GP treatment as usual, but the effect is small and not statistically significant at one year follow-up. Supportive listening delivered by trained nurse therapists is not an effective treatment for CFS/ME. Trial registration International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number IRCTN74156610.

Indexed as

Home Care ServicesSelf CareAdolescentAdultAgedCommunity Health NursingEducation, NursingExercise TherapyFatigue Syndrome, ChronicFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient CompliancePractice Patterns, Nurses'Quality of Health Care

Identifiers

PMID20418251
PMCPMC2859122
OpenAlexW2127088103

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.