Huibers, Marcus J H, Beurskens, Anna J H M, Van Schayck, Constant P et al. · The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2004 · DOI
This study tested whether a short course of talking therapy (cognitive-behavioural therapy) delivered by general doctors could help employees with persistent, unexplained fatigue who were on sick leave. Over one year, patients who received 5-7 sessions of this therapy showed no greater improvement in fatigue, work absences, or recovery than those who received no treatment. The therapy did not prove helpful for this type of fatigue.
This study is important because it directly tests a widely-promoted intervention (CBT) in a population with fatigue including ME/CFS, using rigorous RCT methodology. The null result challenges assumptions that brief, GP-delivered CBT is effective for unexplained persistent fatigue and questions whether resource allocation to this intervention is justified for ME/CFS patients.
This study does not prove that CBT is ineffective for all fatigue conditions or all patients; it only demonstrates lack of efficacy in this particular population receiving brief sessions from GPs. It does not establish that longer, more intensive CBT delivered by specialists would not be beneficial. The study cannot determine whether patient selection, therapy intensity, provider training, or other factors influenced the null result.
About the PEM badge: “PEM required” means post-exertional malaise was an explicit required diagnostic criterion for participant inclusion in this study — not that PEM was studied, observed, or discussed. Studies using criteria that do not require PEM (e.g. Fukuda, Oxford) are tagged “PEM not required”. How the atlas works →
Spotted an error in this entry? Report it →