Jason Leonard A, Brown Abigail, Evans Meredyth, Sunnquist Madison, Newton Julia L
DePaul University.
Fatigue. 2013 Jun 1;1(3):168-183. doi: 10.1080/21641846.2013.774556.
Much debate is transpiring regarding whether chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) are different illnesses. Several prior studies that compared the Fukuda et al. CFS criteria to the Canadian ME/CFS criteria found that the Canadian criteria identified patients with more functional impairments and greater physical, mental, and cognitive problems than those who met Fukuda et al. criteria.[3,4] These samples were located in the Chicago metropolitan area, so the results could not be generalized to other locations. In addition, past studies used a symptom questionnaire that was not specifically developed to tap the Canadian criteria.
The present comparative study of CFS and ME/CFS criteria was intended to correct the methodological problems of prior studies.
This article used data from three distinct samples to compare patients who met criteria for the ME/CFS Canadian clinical case definition [1] to those who met the Fukuda et al. CFS case definition.[2].
Findings indicated that fewer individuals met the Canadian criteria than the Fukuda et al. criteria. Those who met the Canadian criteria evidenced more severe symptoms and physical functioning impairment.
Future research should continue to compare existing case definitions and determine which criteria best select for this illness.
关于慢性疲劳综合征(CFS)和肌痛性脑脊髓炎(ME)是否为不同疾病,目前存在诸多争论。此前有多项研究将福田等人的CFS标准与加拿大ME/CFS标准进行比较,结果发现,与符合福田等人标准的患者相比,加拿大标准所识别出的患者功能障碍更多,身体、心理和认知问题也更严重。[3,4]这些样本来自芝加哥大都市地区,因此研究结果无法推广至其他地区。此外,过去的研究使用的症状问卷并非专门为契合加拿大标准而设计。
当前对CFS和ME/CFS标准的比较研究旨在纠正先前研究中的方法学问题。
本文使用了来自三个不同样本的数据,将符合ME/CFS加拿大临床病例定义标准[1]的患者与符合福田等人CFS病例定义标准[2]的患者进行比较。
研究结果表明,符合加拿大标准的个体比符合福田等人标准的个体更少。符合加拿大标准的个体症状更严重,身体功能受损更明显。
未来的研究应继续比较现有的病例定义,并确定哪种标准最适合用于筛选该疾病。