Guided graded exercise self-help for chronic fatigue syndrome: Long term follow up and cost-effectiveness following the GETSET trial.

OBJECTIVE: The GETSET trial found that guided graded exercise self-help (GES) improved fatigue and physical functioning more than specialist medical care (SMC) alone in adults with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) 12 weeks after randomisation. In this paper, we assess the longer-term clinical and health economic outcomes. METHODS: GETSET was a randomised controlled trial of 211 UK secondary care patients with CFS. Primary outcomes were the Chalder fatigue questionnaire and the physical functioning subscale of the short-form-36 survey. Postal questionnaires assessed the primary outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the intervention 12 months after randomisation. Service costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were combined in a cost-effectiveness analysis. RESULTS: Between January 2014 and March 2016, 164 (78%) participants returned questionnaires 15 months after randomisation. Results showed no main effect of intervention arm on fatigue (chi2(1) = 4.8, p = 0.03) or physical functioning (chi2(1) = 1.3, p = 0.25), adjusting for multiplicity. No other intervention arm or time*arm effect was significant. The short-term fatigue reduction was maintained at long-term follow-up for participants assigned to GES, with improved fatigue from short- to long-term follow up after SMC, such that the groups no longer differed. Healthcare costs were £85 higher for GES and produced more QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £4802 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: The short-term improvements after GES were maintained at long-term follow-up, with further improvement in the SMC group such that the groups no longer differed at long-term follow-up. The cost per QALY for GES compared to SMC alone was below the usual threshold indicating cost-effectiveness, but with uncertainty around the result.

Protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled parallel-group trial to compare the effectiveness of remotely delivered cognitive-behavioural and graded exercise interventions with usual care alone to lessen the impact of fatigue in inflammatory rheumatic diseases (LIFT).

INTRODUCTION: Fatigue remains pervasive, disabling and challenging to manage across all inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs). Non-pharmacological interventions, specifically cognitive-behavioural approaches (CBAs) and graded exercise programmes designed to support and increase exercise, are valuable treatments which help patients with IRD to manage their fatigue. Yet, healthcare systems have encountered substantial barriers to the implementation of these therapeutic options. Lessening the Impact of Fatigue in Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases: a Randomised Trial (LIFT) is designed to give insights into the effectiveness of a remotely delivered standardised intervention for a range of patients with IRD. It will also enable the exploration of putative moderating factors which may allow for the future triage of patients and to investigate the precise mediators of treatment effect in IRD-related fatigue. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: LIFT is a pragmatic, multicentre, three-arm randomised, controlled trial, which will test whether adapted CBA and personalised exercise programme interventions can individually reduce the impact and severity of fatigue. This will be conducted with up to 375 eligible patients diagnosed with IRD and interventions will be delivered by rheumatology healthcare professionals, using the telephone or internet-based audio/video calls. ETHICS APPROVAL AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by Wales REC 7 (17/WA/0065). Results of this study will be disseminated through presentation at scientific conferences and in scientific journal. A lay summary of the results will be sent to participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03248518; Pre-results.

Health care resource use by patients before and after a diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS/ME): a clinical practice research datalink study.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to investigate patterns of health care resource use by patients before and after a diagnosis of CFS/ME, as recorded by Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GP practices in the UK. METHODS: We used a case-control study design in which patients who had a first recorded diagnosis of CFS/ME during the period 01/01/2001 to 31/12/2013 were matched 1:1 with controls by age, sex, and GP practice. We compared rates of GP consultations, diagnostic tests, prescriptions, referrals, and symptoms between the two groups from 15 years (in adults) or 10 years (in children) before diagnosis to 10 years after diagnosis. RESULTS: Data were available for 6710 adult and 916 child (age <18 years) matched case-control pairs. Rates of GP consultations, diagnostic tests, prescriptions, referrals, and symptoms spiked dramatically in the year when a CFS/ME diagnosis was recorded. GP consultation rates were 50% higher in adult cases compared to controls 11-15 years before diagnosis (rate ratio (RR) 1.49 (95% CI 1.46, 1.52)) and 56% higher 6-10 years after diagnosis (RR 1.56 (1.54, 1.57)). In children, consultation rates in cases were 45% higher 6-10 years before diagnosis (RR 1.45 (1.40, 1.51)) and 62% higher 6-10 years after diagnosis (RR 1.62 (1.54, 1.70)). For adults and children, rates of tests, prescriptions, referrals, and symptoms were higher in cases compared to controls for up to 10 years before and after diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Adults and children with CFS/ME have greater health care needs than the rest of the population for at least ten years before their diagnosis, and these higher levels of health care resource use continue for at least ten years after diagnosis.

Trends in the incidence of chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia in the UK, 2001-2013: a Clinical Practice Research Datalink study.

Objective Trends in recorded diagnoses of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS, also known as 'myalgic encephalomyelitis' (ME)) and fibromyalgia (FM) in the UK were last reported more than ten years ago, for the period 1990-2001. Our aim was to analyse trends in incident diagnoses of CFS/ME and FM for the period 2001-2013, and to investigate whether incidence might vary by index of multiple deprivation (IMD) score. Design Electronic health records cohort study. Setting NHS primary care practices in the UK. Participants Participants: Patients registered with general practices linked to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) primary care database from January 2001 to December 2013. Main outcome measure Incidence of CFS/ME, FM, post-viral fatigue syndrome (PVFS), and asthenia/debility. Results The overall annual incidence of recorded cases of CFS/ME was 14.8 (95% CI 14.5, 15.1) per 100,000 people. Overall annual incidence per 100,000 people for FM was 33.3 (32.8-33.8), for PVFS 12.2 (11.9, 12.5), and for asthenia/debility 7.0 (6.8, 7.2). Annual incidence rates for CFS/ME diagnoses decreased from 17.5 (16.1, 18.9) in 2001 to 12.6 (11.5, 13.8) in 2013 (annual percent change -2.8% (-3.6%, -2.0%)). Annual incidence rates for FM diagnoses decreased from 32.3 (30.4, 34.3) to 27.1 (25.5, 28.6) in 2007, then increased to 38.2 (36.3, 40.1) per 100,000 people in 2013. Overall annual incidence of recorded fatigue symptoms was 2246 (2242, 2250) per 100,000 people. Compared with the least deprived IMD quintile, incidence of CFS/ME in the most deprived quintile was 39% lower (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.61 (0.50, 0.75)), whereas rates of FM were 40% higher (IRR 1.40 (0.95, 2.06)). Conclusion These analyses suggest a gradual decline in recorded diagnoses of CFS/ME since 2001, and an increase in diagnoses of fibromyalgia, with opposing socioeconomic patterns of lower rates of CFS/ME diagnoses in the poorest areas compared with higher rates of FM diagnoses.

A randomised trial of adaptive pacing therapy, cognitive behaviour therapy, graded exercise, and specialist medical care for chronic fatigue syndrome (PACE): statistical analysis plan.

BACKGROUND: The publication of protocols by medical journals is increasingly becoming an accepted means for promoting good quality research and maximising transparency. Recently, Finfer and Bellomo have suggested the publication of statistical analysis plans (SAPs).The aim of this paper is to make public and to report in detail the planned analyses that were approved by the Trial Steering Committee in May 2010 for the principal papers of the PACE (Pacing, graded Activity, and Cognitive behaviour therapy: a randomised Evaluation) trial, a treatment trial for chronic fatigue syndrome. It illustrates planned analyses of a complex intervention trial that allows for the impact of clustering by care providers, where multiple care-providers are present for each patient in some but not all arms of the trial. RESULTS: The trial design, objectives and data collection are reported. Considerations relating to blinding, samples, adherence to the protocol, stratification, centre and other clustering effects, missing data, multiplicity and compliance are described. Descriptive, interim and final analyses of the primary and secondary outcomes are then outlined. CONCLUSIONS: This SAP maximises transparency, providing a record of all planned analyses, and it may be a resource for those who are developing SAPs, acting as an illustrative example for teaching and methodological research. It is not the sum of the statistical analysis sections of the principal papers, being completed well before individual papers were drafted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN54285094 assigned 22 May 2003; First participant was randomised on 18 March 2005.

Adaptive pacing, cognitive behaviour therapy, graded exercise, and specialist medical care for chronic fatigue syndrome: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: The PACE trial compared the effectiveness of adding adaptive pacing therapy (APT), cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), or graded exercise therapy (GET), to specialist medical care (SMC) for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. This paper reports the relative cost-effectiveness of these treatments in terms of quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and improvements in fatigue and physical function. METHODS: Resource use was measured and costs calculated. Healthcare and societal costs (healthcare plus lost production and unpaid informal care) were combined with QALYs gained, and changes in fatigue and disability; incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were computed. RESULTS: SMC patients had significantly lower healthcare costs than those receiving APT, CBT and GET. If society is willing to value a QALY at £30,000 there is a 62.7% likelihood that CBT is the most cost-effective therapy, a 26.8% likelihood that GET is most cost effective, 2.6% that APT is most cost-effective and 7.9% that SMC alone is most cost-effective. Compared to SMC alone, the incremental healthcare cost per QALY was £18,374 for CBT, £23,615 for GET and £55,235 for APT. From a societal perspective CBT has a 59.5% likelihood of being the most cost-effective, GET 34.8%, APT 0.2% and SMC alone 5.5%. CBT and GET dominated SMC, while APT had a cost per QALY of £127,047. ICERs using reductions in fatigue and disability as outcomes largely mirrored these findings. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing the four treatments using a health care perspective, CBT had the greatest probability of being the most cost-effective followed by GET. APT had a lower probability of being the most cost-effective option than SMC alone. The relative cost-effectiveness was even greater from a societal perspective as additional cost savings due to reduced need for informal care were likely.