| Literature DB >> 31959235 |
Marieke Houniet-de Gier1,2, Heleen Beckerman3, Kimberley van Vliet3, Hans Knoop4, Vincent de Groot3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) has been found to be effective in reducing fatigue severity in MS patients directly following treatment. However, long-term effects are inconsistent leaving room for improvement. In addition, individual face-to-face CBT draws heavily on limited treatment capacity, and the travel distance to the treatment centre can be burdensome for patients. Therefore, we developed "MS Fit", a blended CBT for MS-related fatigue, based on a face-to-face CBT protocol found effective in a previous study, and "MS Stay Fit", internet-based booster sessions to improve long-term effectiveness of CBT for MS-related fatigue. This article presents the protocol of two randomised clinical trials (RCTs) conducted within one study investigating (1) the non-inferiority of MS Fit compared with evidence-based face-to-face CBT for MS-related fatigue and (2) the effectiveness of MS Stay Fit on the long-term outcome of fatigue compared with no booster sessions. METHODS/Entities:
Keywords: Blended care; Booster sessions; Cognitive behavioural therapy; Fatigue; Internet; Long-term effectiveness; Multiple sclerosis; Non-inferiority trial; Randomised clinical trial; Study protocol
Year: 2020 PMID: 31959235 PMCID: PMC6971870 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-019-3825-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Trials ISSN: 1745-6215 Impact factor: 2.279
Fig. 1Study design
Inclusion and exclusion criteria of the non-inferiority trial
| Inclusion criteria | Exclusion criteria |
|---|---|
| a. Definitive diagnosis of MS confirmed by a neurologist | a. Depression (BDI >4 and meeting criteria of depression as assessed by MINI) |
| b. Severely fatigued (CIS20r fatigue ≥35) | b. Primary sleep disorders (anamnesis) |
| c. Age between 18 and 70 | c. Severe co-morbidity (CIRS item ≥3) |
| d. Ambulatory patients (EDSS ≤6) | d. Current pregnancy or having given birth in the past 3 months |
| e. No evident signs of an exacerbation, or corticosteroid treatment in the past three months | e. Pharmacological treatment for fatigue that was started in the past 3 months |
| f. No current infections (anamnesis) | f. Non-pharmacological therapies for fatigue that took place in the last 3 months |
| g. No anaemia (anamnesis) | g. Receiving CBT in the TREFAMS-CBT trial |
| h. A normal thyroid function (anamnesis) |
Abbreviations: BDI Beck Depression Inventory, CBT cognitive behavioural therapy, CIRS Cumulative Illness Rating Scale, CIS20r Checklist Individual Strength, EDSS Expanded Disability Status Scale, MINI mini international neuropsychiatric interview, MS multiple sclerosis, TREFAMS TREating FAtigue in MS
Participating treatment centres
| Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU University Medical Center in Amsterdam | |
| Expert Center for Chronic Fatigue, Amsterdam University Medical Centers | |
| Maasstad Hospital in Rotterdam | |
| Rijndam rehabilitation center in Rotterdam | |
| Basalt rehabilitation center in Leiden | |
| Sint Maartenskliniek in Nijmegen | |
| Roessingh rehabilitation center in Enschede | |
| Klimmendaal rehabilitation center in Zutphen | |
| Canisius Wilhelmina hospital in Nijmegen | |
| Rehabilitation center Friesland in Sneek | |
| National MS center in Melsbroek (Belgium) | |
| Bravis hospital in Roosendaal and Bergen op Zoom | |
| Libra rehabilitation center in Tilburg | |
| De Hoogstraat rehabilitation center in Utrecht |
Cognitive behavioural therapy modules and assessment tools used for patient tailoring of fatigue treatment
| Treatment modules | Questionnaires and instruments |
|---|---|
Positive and concrete goals of the fatigue treatment are formulated by each patient. The goals consist of activities they would do when no longer severely fatigued. | All patients |
The importance of a regular sleep–wake cycle and a good sleep hygiene are discussed, and instructions are given how to improve this. | Sickness Impact Profile subscale sleep and rest (scores ≥60) [ Sleep log during one week |
In case of non-accepting cognitions of having MS and extreme fear of the future, the patient will be helped to gather realistic information about MS, to develop helping cognitions about MS and the personal future and to develop and maintain a more accepting attitude towards the illness and its consequences. | Impact Event Scale (IES ≥20) [ subscale Acceptance of the Illness Cognition Questionnaire (ICQ-acceptance ≤12) [ Fear of Disease progression Questionnaire–short form (FoP-Q-SF ≥34) [ The Cognitive behavioural Responses to Symptoms Questionnaire (CBRSQ) [ - Resting behaviour >14.3, - all-or-nothing behaviour >12.9, - symptom focusing >15.5, - Embarrassment >16.4, - Damage >20.5, - Fear avoidance >15.3 |
Sense of control over fatigue symptoms (self-efficacy), fatigue catastrophizing, somatic attributions and other dysfunctional thoughts are assessed [ | modified Self Efficacy Scale for fatigue (≤19), Jacobson-Fatigue Catastrophizing Scale (≥16) [ |
Information about and consequences of focusing on fatigue will be discussed. Patients will practice with redirecting the focus of attention (away from the fatigue towards activity and other sensations). | Illness Management Questionnaire (≥4) [ |
Depending on the activity pattern, patients will learn to spread activities more evenly, sometimes to lower activities and followed by a systematical increase of regular physical activity. After patients have increased their physical activity level, they increase other activities in order to reach the goals step by step. | Activity Pattern Interview |
The relationship with reduction in social activities as well as the cognitions about these activities and fatigue will be assessed in relation to the set goals. Suggestions how to increase social activities and how to handle the problems that are experienced during social interactions (as a consequence of cognitive impairments or intolerance of noise) are given. | Sickness Impact Profile (≥100) [ subscale social functioning of the SF-36 (≤65) [ |
Patients are supported with regard to practicing and expanding mental activities such as computer use of reading. They learn how to deal with possible cognitive deficits such as concentration and memory problems. | CIS20r concentration subscale (score ≥18) [ |
The goal of this module is to support emotional independence of others as far as fatigue is concerned. Unrealistic expectations of others and expressing boundaries are discussed. | The Sonderen Social Support Inventory: subscale discrepancy (score ≥50) subscale negative interactions (score ≥14) [ |
Dysfunctional pain cognitions are challenged, and more helpful pain cognitions will be installed. | SF-36 bodily pain subscale (score ≤40) Pain Catastrophizing Scale (score ≥16) [ |
Abbreviations: CIS20r Checklist Individual Strength, SF-36 36-Item Short Form Survey
Fig. 2Time points of all measurements
Fig. 3Illustration of a possible result of the non-inferiority tria. Difference between face-to-face CBT and blended CBT and the 95% CI. H0: blended CBT is inferior to face-to-face CBT, meaning that face-to-face CBT – blended CBT ≥ M. Mis the non-inferiority margin (6.67–5.32 = 1.35). H1: blended CBT is non-inferior to face-to-face CBT, meaning that face-to-face CBT – blended CBT < Ml