Psychosomatic Medicine Tips for Better Browsing
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH

Published online before print February 6, 2008
Psychosom Med 2008, doi:10.1097/PSY.0b013e3181643065
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by van Kessel, K.
Right arrow Articles by Robinson, E.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by van Kessel, K.
Right arrow Articles by Robinson, E.
Related Collections
Right arrow Therapeutic Interventions
© 2008 by American Psychosomatic Society

Original Article


Received March 23, 2007
Returned for revision October 6, 2007

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Multiple Sclerosis Fatigue

Kirsten van Kessel , PhD, PGDipClinPsych, Rona Moss-Morris , PhD, CPsychol, Ernest Willoughby , MBChB, FRACP, Trudie Chalder , PhD, DipBehavPsych, Malcolm H. Johnson , MA, DipClinPsych, Elizabeth Robinson , MSc


Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Rona Moss-Morris, PhD, CPsychol, E-mail: R.E.Moss-Morris{at}soton.ac.uk.


   Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) as a treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS) fatigue. Methods: A randomized controlled design was used where 72 patients with MS fatigue were randomly assigned to eight weekly sessions of CBT or relaxation training (RT). RT was designed to control for therapist time and attention. Participants were assessed before and after treatment, and at 3 and 6 months posttreatment. The primary outcome was the Fatigue Scale. Secondary outcomes included measures of stress, mood, and fatigue-related impairment. Results: Analysis was by intention-to-treat. A group by time interaction showed that the CBT group reported significantly greater reductions in fatigue across the 8 months compared with the RT group (p < .02). Calculated effect sizes for fatigue from baseline to the end of treatment were 3.03 [95% confidence interval, 2.22–3.68] for the CBT group and 1.83 [95% confidence interval, 1.26–2.34] for the RT group. Results also indicted that both groups showed clinically significant decreases in fatigue defined as fatigue levels equivalent or less than those reported by a nonfatigued healthy comparison group. There were no significant interactions between group and any of the secondary outcome variables, with both groups showing improvements over time on all measures. Interpretation: Both CBT and RT appear to be clinically effective treatments for fatigue in MS patients, although the effects for CBT are greater than those for RT. Even 6 months after treatment, both treatment groups reported levels of fatigue equivalent to those of the healthy comparison group.

Key Words: Multiple sclerosis, fatigue, cognitive behavior therapy, randomized controlled trial







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2008 by the American Psychosomatic Society