Housebound versus nonhousebound patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract

Objectives

The objective of this study was to examine individuals with myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome who are confined to their homes due to severe symptomatology. The existing literature fails to address differences between this group, and less severe, nonhousebound patient populations.

Methods

Participants completed the DePaul Symptom Questionnaire, a measure of myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome symptomology, and the SF-36, a measure of health impact on physical/mental functioning. ANOVAs and, where appropriate, MANCOVAS were used to compare housebound and nonhousebound patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome across areas of functioning, symptomatology, and illness onset characteristics.

Results

Findings indicated that the housebound group represented one quarter of the sample, and were significantly more impaired with regards to physical functioning, bodily pain, vitality, social functioning, fatigue, postexertional malaise, sleep, pain, neurocognitive, autonomic, neuroendocrine, and immune functioning compared to individuals who were not housebound.

Discussion

Findings indicated that housebound patients have more impairment on functional and symptom outcomes compared to those who were not housebound. Understanding the differences between housebound and not housebound groups holds implications for physicians and researchers as they develop interventions intended for patients who are most severely affected by this chronic illness.

Keywords

Chronic illness housebound chronic fatigue syndrome myalgic encephalomyelitis severely ill

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Jason

King

Richman

. US case definition of chronic fatigue syndrome: diagnostic and theoretical issues. J Chronic Fatigue Syndr 1999; 5: 3–33.

Asbring

. Chronic illness—a disruption in life: identity-transformation among women with chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia. J Adv Nurs 2001; 34: 312–319.

Söderlund

Skoge

Malterud

. “I could not lift my arm holding the fork…”: living with chronic fatigue syndrome. Scand J Prim Health Care 2000; 18: 165–169.

Bombardier

Buchwald

. Outcome and prognosis of patients with chronic fatigue vs chronic fatigue syndrome. Arch Intern Med 1995; 155: 2105–2110.

Bonner

Ron

Chalder

. Adolescent chronic fatigue syndrome: a follow up study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994; 57: 617–621.

Hill

Tiersky

Scavalla

. Natural history of severe chronic fatigue syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80: 1090–1094.

Wilson

Hickie

Lloyd

. Longitudinal study of outcome of chronic fatigue syndrome. Br Med J 1994; 308: 756–759.

Jason

Fennell

Taylor

. Handbook of chronic fatigue syndrome, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2003.

Anderson

Ferrans

. The quality of life of persons with chronic fatigue syndrome. J Nerv Ment Dis 1997; 185: 359–367.

10.

Hvidberg

Brinth

Olesen

. The health-related quality of life for patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). PLoS One 2015; 10: e0132421–e0132421.

11.

Buchwald

Pearlman

Umali

. Functional status in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, other fatiguing illnesses, and healthy individuals. Am J Med 1996; 101: 364–370.

12.

Yeomans

Conway

. Biopsychosocial aspects of chronic fatigue syndrome (myalgic encephalomyelitis). J Infect 1991; 23: 263–269.

13.

Feiden

. Hope and help for chronic fatigue syndrome: the official guide of the CFS/CFIDS network, Palmer, Alaska: Fireside Books, 1990.

14.

Abbot

. Severely overlooked by science. Interaction 2014; 49: 14–16. http://www.actionforme.org.uk/get-informed/publications/interaction-magazine/ .

15.

Wiborg

van der Werf

Prins

. Being homebound with chronic fatigue syndrome: a multidimensional comparison with outpatients. Psychiatry Res 2010; 177: 246–249.

16.

The 25% M.E. Group. Severely affected ME (Myalgic Encephalomyelitis) Analysis Report on Questionnaire issued January 2004, http://www.25megroup.org/Information/Group%20Publications/Group%reports/March%202004%20Severe%20ME%20Analysis%20Report.doc (2004, accessed August 2015)..

17.

ME Research UK. Survey of the experiences of housebound/bed-bound ME/CFS Patients, http://www.meresearch.org.uk/research/reviews/experiences.html (2000, accessed August 2015).

18.

Pheby

Saffron

. Risk factors for severe ME/CFS. Biol Med 2009; 1: 50–74.

19.

Goldberg

. A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. Pers Psychol Eur 1999; 7: 7–28.

20.

Goldberg

The comparative validity of adult personality inventories: Applications of a consumer-testing framework. In: Briggs

Cheek

Donahue

(eds). Handbook of adult personality inventories, New York: Plenum, 2001.

21.

Goldberg LR. A scientific collaboratory for the development of advanced measures of personality and other individual differences. International Personality Item Pool.

22.

Carruthers

Jain

De Meirleir

. Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome: clinical working case definition, diagnostic and treatment protocols. J Chronic Fatigue Syndr 2003; 11: 7–115.

23.

Carruthers

van de Sande

De Meirleir

. Myalgic encephalomyelitis: international consensus criteria. J Intern Med 2011; 270: 327–338.

24.

Fukuda

Straus

Hickie

. The chronic fatigue syndrome: a comprehensive approach to its definition and study. Ann Intern Med 1994; 121: 953–959.

25.

Jason

Evans

Porter

. The development of a revised Canadian myalgic encephalomyelitis chronic fatigue syndrome case definition. Am J Biochem Biotechnol 2010; 6: 120–135.

26.

Brown

Jason

. Validating a measure of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome symptomatology. Fatigue Biomed Health Behav 2014; 2: 132–152.

27.

Jason

Brown

. Test–retest reliability of the DePaul Symptom Questionnaire. Fatigue Biomed Health Behav 2015; 3: 16–32.

28.

Hawk

Jason

Torres-Harding

. Reliability of a chronic fatigue syndrome questionnaire. J Chronic Fatigue Syndr 2006; 13: 41–66.

29.

Ware

Jr Sherbourne

. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30: 473–483.

30.

Stewart

Hays

Ware

. The MOS short-form general health survey: reliability and validity in a patient population. Med Care 1988; 22: 724–735.

31.

McHorney

Ware

Jr Lu

. The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Med Care 1994; 32: 40–66.

32.

McHorney

Ware

Jr Raczek

. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993; 22: 247–263.

33.

Zdunek

Jason

Evans

. A cross cultural comparison of disability and symptomatology associated with CFS. Int J Psychol Behav Sciences 2015; 5(2): 98–107.

34.

Action for ME. ME in the UK: Action for M.E. Membership Survey, http://www.actionforme.org.uk/Resources/Action%20for%20ME/Documents/get-informed/severely%20Neglected%202001.pdf (2011, accessed August 2015).

35.

Denz-Penhey

Murdoch

. General practitioners acceptance of the validity of chronic fatigue syndrome as a diagnosis. N Z Med J 1993; 106: 122–124.

36.

Ho-Yen

McNamara

. General practitioners’ experience of the chronic fatigue syndrome. Br J Gen Pract 1991; 41: 324–326.

37.

Ray

Weir

Cullen

. Illness perception and symptom components in chronic fatigue syndrome. J Psychosom Res 1992; 36: 243–256.

38.

Jason

Richman

Rademaker

. A community-based study of chronic fatigue syndrome. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159: 2129–2137.