Videoconference-delivered group Cognitive Behavioral Stress Management for ME/CFS patients who present with severe PEM: A randomized controlled trial.

Background: In Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), post-exertional malaise (PEM) is associated with greater distress and symptoms. Cognitive Behavioral Stress Management (CBSM) has demonstrated beneficial effects for ME/CFS and may mitigate stress-related triggers of PEM. We tested a virtual CBSM intervention to increase access, and we report on its effects on stress and symptoms in ME/CFS patients with severe PEM. Methods: Data were from a randomized controlled trial (NCT01650636) comparing 10-week videoconference-delivered group CBSM (V-CBSM, n=75) to a 10-week Health Information active control (V-HI, n=75) in Fukuda criteria ME/CFS patients (71 classified as highPEM, 79 lowPEM). Linear regression explored PEM-by-Treatment interactions on overall symptom frequency and intensity, perceived stress, and fatigue-specific interference and intensity, at 5-month follow-up. Logistic regression tested V-CBSM effects on 5-month PEM status. Analyses controlled for age, gender, race/ethnicity, mode of symptom onset, and time since diagnosis. Results: The sample was middle-aged (47.96±10.89 years), mostly women (87%) and non-Hispanic White (65%), with no group differences on these variables or baseline PEM. For highPEM patients, V-CBSM (versus V-HI) demonstrated medium to large effects on follow-up symptom frequency, symptom intensity, fatigue interference, and fatigue intensity (p's < .05) and trending to significant reductions in perceived stress (p =.07). Differences were not evident for lowPEM patients. Treatment predicted follow-up PEM status at a trend (p = .058), with patients receiving V-CBSM demonstrating half the risk of highPEM classification versus V-HI. Conclusions: V-CBSM demonstrates benefits for ME/CFS patients presenting with severe PEM and may reduce the expression of PEM over time.

Dealing with Corticosteroid and High-Dose Cyclosporine Therapy in a Pyoderma Gangrenosum Patient Contracting a COVID-19 Infection.

Pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is a rare and chronic neutrophil inflammation belonging to the spectrum of autoinflammatory disorders. Immunosuppressive therapy is the cornerstone of successful treatment. However, due to the global COVID-19 pandemic, physicians struggle with therapeutic strategies during infection. This paper describes the case of a 58-year-old patient with a very painful, rapidly increasing wound on his right foot, which was diagnosed as pyoderma gangrenosum. Five weeks after the initial treatment with high-dose immunosuppressives (combination therapy with cyclosporine A and systemic methylprednisolone), he became infected with COVID-19. Reduction in the immunosuppressive dosage proved effective, as the patient recovered from COVID-19 without any complication and showed rapid wound healing.

I. Indices of Pain Intensity Derived From Ecological Momentary Assessments: Rationale and Stakeholder Preferences.

Pain assessment that fully represents patients' pain experiences is essential for chronic pain research and management. The traditional primary outcome measure has been a patient's average pain intensity over a time period. In this series of 3 articles, we examine whether pain assessment can be enhanced by considering additional outcome measures capturing temporal aspects of pain, such as pain maxima, duration, and variability. Ecological momentary assessment makes the assessment of such indices readily available. In this first article, we discuss the rationale for considering additional pain indices derived from ecological momentary assessment and examine which are most important to stakeholders. Patients (n = 32), clinicians (n = 20), and clinical trialists (n = 20) were interviewed about their preference rankings for Average, Worst, and Least Pain, Time in High Pain, Time in No/Low Pain, Pain Variability, and Pain Unpredictability. Each stakeholder group displayed a distinct preference hierarchy for different indices, and there were few commonalities between groups. Patients favored Worst Pain and Time in High Pain, followed by Pain Variability and Unpredictability. Trialists favored Average Pain, whereas clinicians favored Worst Pain. Results suggest that multiple temporal aspects of pain are relevant for stakeholders and should be considered when evaluating the efficacy of pain management. PERSPECTIVE: Examining which aspects of pain are most important to measure from the perspective of different stakeholders can facilitate efforts to include all relevant treatment outcomes. Our study suggests that multiple temporal aspects of pain intensity are important to stakeholders. This should be considered when evaluating the efficacy of pain management.

Beyond Average: Providers' Assessments of Indices for Measuring Pain Intensity in Patients With Chronic Pain.

Introduction: Effective clinical care for chronic pain requires accurate, comprehensive, meaningful pain assessment. This study investigated healthcare providers' perspectives on seven pain measurement indices for capturing pain intensity. Methods: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample from four US regions of 20 healthcare providers who treat patients with chronic pain. The qualitative interview guide included open-ended questions to address perspectives on pain measurement, and included quantitative ratings of the importance of seven indices [average pain, worst pain, least pain, time in no/low pain, time in high pain, fluctuating pain, unpredictable pain]. Qualitative interview data were read, coded and analyzed for themes and final interpretation. Standard quantitative methods were used to analyze index importance ratings. Results: Despite concerns regarding 10-point visual analog and numeric rating scales, almost all providers used them. Providers most commonly asked about average pain, although they expressed misgivings about patient reporting and the index's informational value. Some supplemented average with worst and least pain, and most believed pain intensity is best understood within the context of patient functioning. Worst pain received the highest mean importance rating (7.60), average pain the second lowest rating (5.65), and unpredictable pain the lowest rating (5.20). Discussion: Assessing average pain intensity obviates obtaining clinical insight into daily contextual factors relating to pain and functioning. Pain index use, together with timing, functionality and disability, may be most effective for understanding the meaning to patients of high pain, how pain affects their life, how life affects their pain, and how pain changes and responds to treatment.

II. Indices of Pain Intensity Derived From Ecological Momentary Assessments and Their Relationships With Patient Functioning: An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis.

Pain intensity is a complex and dynamic experience. A focus on assessing patients' average pain levels may miss important aspects of pain that impact functioning in daily life. In this second of 3 articles investigating alternative indices of pain intensity derived from Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMA), we examine the indices' associations with physical and psychosocial functioning. EMA data from 10 studies (2,660 patients) were reanalyzed to construct indices of Average Pain, Maximum Pain, Minimum Pain, Pain Variability, Time in High Pain, Time in Low Pain, Pain after Wake-up. Three sets of individual patient data meta-analyses examined 1) the test-retest reliability of the pain indices, 2) their convergent validity in relation to physical functioning, fatigue, depression, mental health, and social functioning, and 3) the incremental validity of alternative indices above Average Pain. Reliabilities approaching or exceeding a level of .7 were observed for all indices, and most correlated significantly with all functioning domains, with small to medium effect sizes. Controlling for Average Pain, Maximum Pain and Pain Variability uniquely predicted all functioning measures, and Time in High Pain predicted physical and social functioning. We suggest that alternative pain indices can provide new perspectives for understanding functioning in chronic pain. PERSPECTIVE: Alternative summary measures of pain intensity derived from EMA have the potential to help better understand patients' pain experience. Utilizing EMA for the assessment of Maximum Pain, Pain Variability, and Time in High Pain may provide an enhanced window into the relationships between pain and patients' physical and psychosocial functioning.

Use of Wearable Activity Tracker in Patients With Cancer Undergoing Chemotherapy: Toward Evaluating Risk of Unplanned Health Care Encounters.

PURPOSE: Unplanned health care encounters (UHEs) such as emergency room visits can occur commonly during cancer chemotherapy treatments. Patients at an increased risk of UHEs are typically identified by clinicians using performance status (PS) assessments based on a descriptive scale, such as the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scale. Such assessments can be bias prone, resulting in PS score disagreements between assessors. We therefore propose to evaluate PS using physical activity measurements (eg, energy expenditure) from wearable activity trackers. Specifically, we examined the feasibility of using a wristband (band) and a smartphone app for PS assessments. METHODS: We conducted an observational study on a cohort of patients with solid tumor receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Patients were instructed to wear the band for a 60-day activity-tracking period. During clinic visits, we obtained ECOG scores assessed by physicians, coordinators, and patients themselves. UHEs occurring during the activity-tracking period plus a 90-day follow-up period were later compiled. We defined our primary outcome as the percentage of patients adherent to band-wear ≥ 80% of 10 am to 8 pm for ≥ 80% of the activity-tracking period. In an exploratory analysis, we computed hourly metabolic equivalent of task (MET) and counted 10 am to 8 pm hours with > 1.5 METs as nonsedentary physical activity hours. RESULTS: Forty-one patients completed the study (56.1% female; 61.0% age 40-60 years); 68% were adherent to band-wear. ECOG score disagreement between assessors ranged from 35.3% to 50.0%. In our exploratory analysis, lower average METs and nonsedentary hours, but not higher ECOG scores, were associated with higher 150-day UHEs. CONCLUSION: The use of a wearable activity tracker is generally feasible in a similar population of patients with cancer. A larger randomized controlled trial should be conducted to confirm the association between lower nonsedentary hours and higher UHEs.

How Physicians Spend Their Work Time: an Ecological Momentary Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how physicians spend their work time. OBJECTIVE: To determine how physicians in outpatient care spend their time at work, using an innovative method: ecological momentary assessment (EMA). DESIGN: Physician activity was measured via EMA, using a smartphone app. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-eight practices across 16 US states. Sixty-one physicians: general internal medicine, family medicine, non-interventional cardiology, orthopedics. MAIN MEASURES: Proportions of time spent on 14 activities within 6 broad categories of work: direct patient care (including both face-to-face care and other patient care-related activities), electronic health record (EHR) input, administration, teaching/supervising, personal time, and other. KEY RESULTS: After excluding personal time, physicians spent 66.5% of their time on direct patient care (23.6% multitasking with use of the EHR and 42.9% without the EHR), 20.7% on EHR input alone, 7.7% on administrative activities, and 5.0% on other activities (0.6% using the EHR). In total, physicians spent 44.9% of their time on the EHR. LIMITATIONS: Unable to measure time spent at home on the EHR or other work tasks; participating physicians were not a random sample of US physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The efficiency of highly trained professionals spending only two-thirds of their time on direct patient care may be questioned. EHR use continues to account for a large proportion of physician time. Further attempts should be made to redesign both EHRs and physician work processes.

Post-exertional malaise is associated with greater symptom burden and psychological distress in patients diagnosed with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Post-exertional malaise (PEM) is often considered a cardinal symptom of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). There is no gold standard diagnostic method for CFS, however, and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Fukuda case definition does not require PEM. Research has identified differences in symptom burden between patients according to PEM, but whether it is associated with psychological distress has not been investigated. METHODS: The CDC CFS Inventory, Fatigue Symptom Inventory, Profile of Mood States, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, Perceived Stress Scale, and subscales of the Sickness Impact Profile were administered to 261 patients diagnosed with the Fukuda criteria. PEM status (loPEM/hiPEM) was determined via self-reported post-exertional fatigue severity. Analyses of covariance (ANCOVA), controlling for age and gender, assessed cross-sectional group differences, and cross-sectional linear regressions using the continuous PEM severity predictor paralleled these analyses. RESULTS: hiPEM patients reported greater symptom intensity, frequency, and interference than loPEM counterparts (p's < .001). hiPEM patients also reported greater social disruption, depressive symptoms, and mood disturbance (p's ≤ .011). Groups did not differ in recent negative life experiences, perceived stress, or demographic variables. The results of regression analyses mirrored those of ANCOVAs. CONCLUSION: This study replicates the association between PEM and symptom burden and additionally associates PEM with psychological distress; psychological distress could, however, be a consequence of symptom burden. Differences between hiPEM and loPEM CFS patients highlight the heterogeneity of diagnoses resulting from the Fukuda criteria. It is also possible that PEM identifies particularly distressed patients for whom psychological intervention would be most beneficial.

Patient reported outcomes can improve performance status assessment: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Patient performance status is routinely used in oncology to estimate physical functioning, an important factor in clinical treatment decisions and eligibility for clinical trials. However, validity and reliability data for ratings of performance status have not been optimal. This study recruited oncology patients who were about to begin emetogenic palliative or adjuvant chemotherapy for treatment of solid tumors. We employed actigraphy as the gold standard for physical activity level. Correspondences between actigraphy and oncologists' and patients' ratings of performance status were examined and compared with the correspondences of actigraphy and several patient reported outcomes (PROs). The study was designed to determine feasibility of the measurement approaches and if PROs can improve the accuracy of assessment of performance status. METHODS: Oncologists and patients made performance status ratings at visit 1. Patients wore an actigraph and entered weekly PROs on a smartphone app. Data for days 1-14 after visit 1 were analyzed. Chart reviews were conducted to tabulate all unexpected medical events across days 1-150. RESULTS: Neither oncologist nor patient ratings of performance status predicted steps/hour (actigraphy). The PROMIS® Physical Function PRO (average of Days 1, 7, 14) was associated with steps/hour at high (for men) and moderate (for women) levels; the PROMIS® Fatigue PRO predicted steps for men, but not for women. Unexpected medical events occurred in 57% of patients. Only body weight in female patients predicted events; oncologist and patient performance status ratings, steps/hour, and other PROs did not. CONCLUSIONS: PROMIS® Physical Function and Fatigue PROs show good correspondence with steps/hour making them easy, useful tools for oncologists to improve their assessment of performance status, especially for male patients. Female patients had lower levels of steps/hour than males and lower correlations among the predictors, suggesting the need for further work to improve performance status assessment in women. Assessment of pre-morbid sedentary behavior alongside current Physical Functioning and Fatigue PROs may allow for a more valid determination of disease-related activity level and performance status.

Frames of Reference in Self-Reports of Health, Well-being, Fatigue, and Pain: A Qualitative Examination.

OBJECTIVES: Self-reports in survey research can be affected by internal comparison standards, or Frames of Reference (FoRs), that people apply when making their ratings. The goal of this study was to determine which FoRs people naturally use when rating their health, subjective well-being, fatigue, and pain. We further examined whether FoRs varied by content domain and age group. METHODS: One hundred adults from a community sample of the US general population participated in individual semi-structured qualitative interviews. Participants provided self-report ratings on two of the four content domains and were then systematically queried about FoRs. Interview responses were summarized and coded into broad FoR categories. RESULTS: Four broad FoR categories emerged: References to (1) Other People, (2) an Earlier Time in Life, (3) an Important Event in the Past, and (4) a Hypothetical Situation. FoRs were reported in the majority (80.5%) of responses and multiple FoRs were reported in 34% of responses. The reporting of FoRs was evident for all domains, but was more prevalent for well-being compared to pain. References to a Hypothetical Situation were only mentioned in the well-being and health domains. For health, references to Other People were more frequently reported at older compared to younger ages. DISCUSSION: Our results extend prior work by demonstrating that participants' reporting of FoRs is evident in ratings of various content domains. They further suggest that a limited number of FoRs are used and that their identification holds promise for understanding and controlling systematic group differences in FoRs.

Ecological Momentary Assessment Methodology in Chronic Pain Research: A Systematic Review.

Self-reported pain intensity assessments are central to chronic pain research. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) methodologies are uniquely positioned to collect these data, and are indeed being used in the field. However, EMA protocols are complex, and many decisions are necessary in the design of EMA research studies. A systematic literature review identified 105 articles drawing from 62 quantitative EMA research projects examining pain intensity in adult chronic pain patients. Study characteristics were tabulated to summarize and describe the use of EMA, with an emphasis placed on various dimensions of decision-making involved in executing EMA methodologies. Most identified studies considered within-person relationships between pain and other variables, and a few examined interventions on chronic pain. There was a trend toward the use of smartphones as EMA data collection devices more recently, and completion rates were not reported in nearly one third of studies. Pain intensity items varied widely with respect to number of scale points, anchor labels, and length of reporting period; most used numeric rating scales. Recommendations are provided for reporting to improve reproducibility, comparability, and interpretation of results, and for opportunities to clarify the importance of design decisions. PERSPECTIVE: Studies that use EMA methodologies to assess pain intensity are heterogeneous. Aspects of protocol design, including data input modality and pain item construction, have the potential to influence the data collected. Thorough reporting on design features and completion rates therefore facilitates reproducibility, comparability, and interpretation of study results.

Careless responding in internet-based quality of life assessments.

PURPOSE: Quality of life (QoL) measurement relies upon participants providing meaningful responses, but not all respondents may pay sufficient attention when completing self-reported QoL measures. This study examined the impact of careless responding on the reliability and validity of Internet-based QoL assessments. METHODS: Internet panelists (n = 2000) completed Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) short-forms (depression, fatigue, pain impact, applied cognitive abilities) and single-item QoL measures (global health, pain intensity) as part of a larger survey that included multiple checks of whether participants paid attention to the items. Latent class analysis was used to identify groups of non-careless and careless responders from the attentiveness checks. Analyses compared psychometric properties of the QoL measures (reliability of PROMIS short-forms, correlations among QoL scores, "known-groups" validity) between non-careless and careless responder groups. Whether person-fit statistics derived from PROMIS measures accurately discriminated careless and non-careless responders was also examined. RESULTS: About 7.4% of participants were classified as careless responders. No substantial differences in the reliability of PROMIS measures between non-careless and careless responder groups were observed. However, careless responding meaningfully and significantly affected the correlations among QoL domains, as well as the magnitude of differences in QoL between medical and disability groups (presence or absence of disability, depression diagnosis, chronic pain diagnosis). Person-fit statistics significantly and moderately distinguished between non-careless and careless responders. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the importance of identifying and screening out careless responders to ensure high-quality self-report data in Internet-based QoL research.

Heritability and Longitudinal Stability of Planning and Behavioral Disinhibition Based on the Porteus Maze Test.

The Porteus Maze Test (PMT) provides measures of planning and behavioral disinhibition. The PMT was administered to 941 twins during Wave 1 (9-10 years) and 320 twins during Wave 2 (11-13 years). Participants were drawn from the University of Southern California Risk Factors for Antisocial Behavior Study (RFAB). Heritability of behavioral disinhibition, determined by PMT Q-Score, were 33% at Wave 1 and 52% at Wave 2. For planning, determined by Test Age, heritability was 53% at Wave 1; at Wave 2, the non-shared environment was important in boys, whereas genetic influences were important in girls. Both indices were modestly stable (r = 0.52; r = 0.37). A common genetic factor influenced both indices, respectively, at the two time points, with no 'new' genetic variance at Wave 2; the non-shared environment was time-specific. Thus, both genetic and non-shared environmental influences are important for behavioral disinhibition (Q-Score) and planning (Test Age).