Assessment of fatigue in chronic disease: A bibliographic study of fatigue measurement scales (original) (raw)
Related papers
Fatigue in patients with chronic disease: results from the population-based Lifelines Cohort Study
Scientific Reports, 2021
To evaluate the prevalence of severe and chronic fatigue in subjects with and without chronic disease; (2) to assess to which extent multi-morbidity contributes to severe and chronic fatigue; and (3) to identify predisposing and associated factors for severe and chronic fatigue and whether these are disease-specific, trans-diagnostic, or generic. The Dutch Lifelines cohort was used, including 78,363 subjects with (n = 31,039, 53 ± 12 years, 33% male) and without (n = 47,324, 48 ± 12 years, 46% male) ≥ 1 of 23 chronic diseases. Fatigue was assessed with the Checklist Individual Strength-Fatigue. Compared to participants without a chronic disease, a higher proportion of participants with ≥ 1 chronic disease were severely (23% versus 15%, p < 0.001) and chronically (17% versus 10%, p < 0.001) fatigued. The odds of having severe fatigue (OR [95% CI]) increased from 1.6 [1.5-1.7] with one chronic disease to 5.5 [4.5-6.7] with four chronic diseases; for chronic fatigue from 1.5 [1.5-1.6] to 4.9 [3.9-6.1]. Multiple trans-diagnostic predisposing and associated factors of fatigue were found, explaining 26% of variance in fatigue in chronic disease. Severe and chronic fatigue are highly prevalent in chronic diseases. Multi-morbidity increases the odds of having severe and chronic fatigue. Several transdiagnostic factors were associated with fatigue, providing a rationale for a trans-diagnostic approach. For most people, fatigue is an everyday experience. It becomes a symptom when it is an overwhelming feeling of exhaustion that interferes with the ability to function and perform activities 1. Severe fatigue that persists longer than 6 months is defined as chronic 2. Severe and chronic fatigue is a symptom of many non-communicable chronic diseases e.g. Parkinson's disease (PD) 3 , chronic heart failure (CHF) 4 , chronic obstructive pulmonary
Brain, Behavior, & Immunity - Health
This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Measurement of fatigue: Determining minimally important clinical differences
Clinical Therapeutics, 2002
The purpose was to determine the minimally important clinical difference (MICD) in fatigue as measured by the Profile of Mood States, Schwartz Cancer Fatigue Scale (SCFS), General Fatigue Scale, and a 10-point single-item fatigue measure. The MICD is the smallest amount of change in a symptom (e.g., fatigue) measure that signifies an important change in that symptom. Subjects rated the degree of change in their fatigue over 2 days on a Global Rating Scale. 103 patients were enrolled on this multisite prospective repeated measures design. MICD was determined following established procedures at two time points. Statistically significant changes were observed for moderate and large changes in fatigue, but not for small changes. The scales were sensitive to increases in fatigue over time. The MICD, presented as mean change, for each scale and per item on each scale is: POMS ϭ 5.6, per item ϭ 1.1, SCFS ϭ 5.0, per item ϭ 0.8, GFS ϭ 9.7, per item ϭ 1.0, and the single item measure of fatigue was 2.4 points. This information may be useful in interpreting scale scores and planning studies using these measures.
Identifying Clinically Meaningful Fatigue with the Fatigue Symptom Inventory
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 2008
The Fatigue Symptom Inventory (FSI) has been used extensively to assess and measure fatigue in a number of clinical populations. The purpose of the present study was to further establish its utility by examining its operating characteristics and determining the optimal cutoff score for identifying clinically meaningful fatigue. The SF-36 Vitality scale, a measure widely used to identify individuals with significant fatigue-related disability, was used to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the FSI. Results indicate that a score of 3 or greater on those items assessing fatigue in the past week is the optimal cutoff score for identifying clinically meaningful fatigue. Individuals who scored at or above the cutoff also reported significantly greater fatigue interference, more days of fatigue on average, and fatigue a greater proportion of each day in the past week. Findings suggest that the FSI can be used to discriminate effectively between individuals with and without clinically meaningful fatigue.
Fatigue and quality of life: lessons from the real world
The impact of fatigue on the quality of life of oncology patients is substantial and under-recognized. Fatigue in these patients may begin with a simple decrease in physical activity, but can progress to include a wide range of negative effects that often culminate in patients feeling out of control, lonely, and isolated. In general, surviving cancer patients experience some limitations after the end of treatment but ultimately attain a reasonably good level of functioning. An examination of subpopulations and further analyses of data suggest, however, four different recovery patterns. Patients may: A) improve in their functioning, reach a plateau at approximately year 2 or 3, and then remain at relatively high levels of functioning; B) improve initially, but dete-riorate again after year 2 or 3, never reaching the normal stage; C) improve, returning to normal; or D) have a very mixed pattern of high levels of fatigue that is, to date, very difficult to interpret. Disturbingly, 60% of the survivors in our population of patients with Hodgkin's disease, who were treated in recent trials of the German Hodgkin Study Group and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Lymphoma Group, had medium to high levels of fatigue after 5 cancer-free years. Investigations are essential to determine the current status of long-term survivors in more detail and to link that status to conditions observed during the treatment of acutely ill patients. The Oncologist 2003;8(suppl 1):5-9
The Challenge of Evaluating Fatigue
Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners, 2000
Fatigue, though a common complaint, presents a challenge to nurse practitioners who must evaluate its significance in the primary care setting. Fatigue is described as a multidimensional phenomenon and is classified as physiologic, acute, or chronic. A distinction is made between chronic fatigue and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). The use of the Piper Fatigue Scale is suggested in order to objectively quantify this symptom in clinical practice. In this article, the Habit and Lifestyle Form for the Evaluation of Fatigue is presented as a way to assist the provider in considering simple and obvious causes of fatigue that may otherwise be overlooked. Finally, an algorithm for the evaluation of fatigue is presented.
The aim of this study is the analysis of different descriptors and reactions related to the experience of fatigue. Two groups were compared: a clinical sample (n = 92, 31 males, mean age = 38.87) and a non-clinical (n = 225, 135 males, mean age = 32.45) sample. The total sample was composed of 317 participants (52% males), ranging in age from 18 to 76 years. Findings show the experience of fatigue was mainly related to somatic terms (76% of the total sample). Specific results were found only for the clinical group: (a) significant relationships between fatigue and anxiety, χ2(1) = 34.71, p < .01; tension, χ2(1) = 16.80, p < .01; and sadness, χ2(1) = 24.59, p < .01; (b) higher intensity of fatigue (F = 84.15, p = .001), and predominance of the cognitive components of fatigue. Results showed that fatigue in subjects with a clinical disorder (versus those without) was associated both, to negative emotional states, and to a higher intensity of fatigue, especially in its cognitive elements. Important clinical implications for its assessment and intervention are discussed.
Measuring fatigue in clinical and community settings
Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 2010
Objective: The Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFQ) is a widely used instrument to assess fatigue in both clinical and nonclinical settings. Psychometric properties of the scale and discriminative abilities were examined. Methods: A total of 361 patients with CFS and 1615 individuals in the community were assessed with the CFQ. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to explore the structure of the scale. Receiver-operating characteristic curve (ROC) was used to investigate the discriminative properties.