Price J R, Couper J
Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, The Warneford Hospital, Oxford, UK, OX3 7JX.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000(2):CD001027. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001027.
All randomised controlled trials were included in which - adult patients with CFS; - received CBT or a control intervention, being either orthodox medical management or another intervention; - and whose outcomes were assessed in an appropriate way. CBT could be either type 'A' (encouraging return to 'normal' levels of rest and activity) or type 'B' (encouraging rest and activity which were within levels imposed by the disorder).
The two reviewers worked independently throughout the selection of trials and data extraction, comparing findings only when there was disagreement. Relevant trials were allocated to one of three quality categories. Full data extraction, using a standardised data extraction sheet, was performed on studies which were of high or moderate quality. Trials of low quality were excluded from the review. The comparisons made to test the review hypothesis were of type 'A' CBT versus other intervention(s), and of type 'B' CBT versus other intervention(s). Functional outcome was used as the main outcome for comparison, but other appropriate outcomes were compared where possible. Results were synthesised using the Review Manager software. For dichotomous data, the odds ratio was calculated for each study. For continuous data, effect sizes were obtained and the standardised mean difference, with 95% confidence intervals, was calculated.
Only three relevant trials of adequate quality were found. These trials demonstrated that CBT significantly benefits physical functioning in adult out-patients with CFS when compared to orthodox medical management or relaxation. It is necessary to treat about two patients to prevent one additional unsatisfactory physical outcome about six months after treatment end. CBT appeared highly acceptable to the patients in these trials. There is no satisfactory evidence for the effectiveness of CBT in patients with the milder forms of CFS found in primary care or in patients who are so disabled that they are unable to attend out-patients. Additionally, there is no satisfactory evidence for the effectiveness of group CBT.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive behaviour therapy appears to be an effective and acceptable treatment for adult out-patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. CFS is a common and disabling disorder. Its sufferers deserve the medical profession to be more aware of the potential of this therapy to bring lasting functional benefit, and health service managers to increase its availability. Further research is needed in this important area. Trials should conform to accepted standards of reporting and methodology. The effectiveness of CBT in more and less severely disabled patients than those usually seen in out-patient clinics needs to be assessed. Trials of group CBT and in-patient CBT compared to orthodox medical management, and of CBT compared to graded activity alone, also need to be conducted.
纳入所有随机对照试验,其中——成年CFS患者;——接受CBT或对照干预,对照干预为传统医学管理或其他干预;——并且其结局以适当方式进行评估。CBT可以是“A”型(鼓励恢复到“正常”的休息和活动水平)或“B”型(鼓励在疾病所限定的水平内进行休息和活动)。
两位评审员在整个试验选择和数据提取过程中独立工作,仅在出现分歧时比较结果。相关试验被分配到三个质量类别之一。对高质量或中等质量的研究使用标准化数据提取表进行全面的数据提取。低质量的试验被排除在综述之外。为检验综述假设所进行的比较是“A”型CBT与其他干预措施之间的比较,以及“B”型CBT与其他干预措施之间的比较。功能结局用作主要的比较结局,但在可能的情况下也比较其他适当的结局。使用Review Manager软件对结果进行综合分析。对于二分数据,计算每个研究的比值比。对于连续数据,获得效应量并计算标准化均数差及95%置信区间。
仅发现三项质量合格的相关试验。这些试验表明,与传统医学管理或放松疗法相比,CBT能使成年门诊CFS患者的身体功能显著受益。在治疗结束约六个月后,大约需要治疗两名患者才能预防另外一例不理想的身体结局。在这些试验中,CBT似乎为患者高度接受。对于在初级保健中发现的症状较轻的CFS患者或因残疾严重而无法就诊的门诊患者,没有令人满意的证据表明CBT有效。此外,对于团体CBT的有效性也没有令人满意的证据。
认知行为疗法似乎是成年慢性疲劳综合征门诊患者的一种有效且可接受的治疗方法。CFS是一种常见且使人致残的疾病。其患者理应得到医学界更多关注这种疗法带来持久功能益处的潜力,以及卫生服务管理者提高其可及性。在这个重要领域需要进一步研究。试验应符合公认的报告标准和方法学标准。需要评估CBT在比门诊诊所通常所见患者残疾程度更高和更低的患者中的有效性。还需要进行团体CBT和住院CBT与传统医学管理比较的试验,以及CBT与单纯分级活动比较的试验。