Is physical deconditioning a perpetuating factor in chronic fatigue syndrome? A controlled study on maximal exercise performance and relations with fatigue, impairment and physical activity

Department of Medical Psychology, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Psychological Medicine (Impact Factor: 5.43). 02/2001; 31(1):107-14. DOI: 10.1017/S0033291799003189
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) patients often complain that physical exertion produces an increase of complaints, leading to a greater need for rest and more time spent in bed. It has been suggested that this is due to a bad physical fitness and that physical deconditioning is a perpetuating factor in CFS. Until now, studies on physical deconditioning in CFS have shown inconsistent results.
Twenty CFS patients and 20 matched neighbourhood controls performed a maximal exercise test with incremental load. Heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory tidal volume, O2 saturation, O2 consumption, CO2 production, and blood-gas values of arterialized capillary blood were measured. Physical fitness was quantified as the difference between the actual and predicted ratios of maximal workload versus increase of heart rate. Fatigue, impairment and physical activity were assessed to study its relationship with physical fitness.
There were no statistically significant differences in physical fitness between CFS patients and their controls. Nine CFS patients had a better fitness than their control. A negative relationship between physical fitness and fatigue was found in both groups. For CFS patients a negative correlation between fitness and impairment and a positive correlation between fitness and physical activity was found as well. Finally, it was found that more CFS patients than controls did not achieve a physiological limitation at maximal exercise.
Physical deconditioning does not seem a perpetuating factor in CFS.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This demonstration presents the use of the Library Characterization Environment (LiChEn) for characterizing asynchronous standard cells. The tool was employed for the electrical characterization of a library with over five hundred asynchronous standard cells. In this work, a case study of a fundamental asynchronous component, the C-Element, will be presented to validate the use of the tool. LiChEn was designed due to the necessity of automating the process of characterizing asynchronous standard cells. Albeit this task can be done with tools from industrial EDA vendors, the use of these proved to require laborious manual work. These tools were designed for characterizing standard cells for synchronous systems and usually fail to recognize complex asynchronous logic. Moreover, asynchronous components are not available off the shelf in typical standard cell libraries, which constrains the asynchronous paradigm for full-custom approaches. As asynchronous techniques gain relevance in the research community, LiChEn can present a practical solution for a wider adoption of such techniques, by allowing an automated characterization of asynchronous standard cells.
    Electronics, Circuits and Systems (ICECS), 2012 19th IEEE International Conference on; 01/2012
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent years have brought growing recognition of the need for clinical criteria for myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), which is also called chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). An Expert Subcommittee of Health Canada established the Terms of Reference, and selected an Expert Medical Consensus Panel representing treating physicians, teaching faculty and researchers. A Consensus Workshop was held on March 30 to April 1,2001 to culminate the review process and establish consensus for a clinical working case definition, diagnostic protocols and treatment protocols. We present a systematic clinical working case definition that encourages a diagnosis based on characteristic patterns of symptom clusters, which reflect specific areas of pathogenesis. Diagnostic and treatment protocols, and a short overview of research are given to facilitate a comprehensive and integrated approach to this illness. Throughout this paper, “myalgic encephalomyelitis” and “chronic fatigue syndrome” are used interchangeably and this illness is referred to as “ME/CFS.”
    Journal of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 12/2011; 11(1).
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The current study had two objectives. (1) to compare objective and self-report measures in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) according to the 1994 Center for Disease Control (CDC) criteria, patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), and healthy controls, and (2) to contrast CFS patients who only fulfill CDC criteria to those who also fulfill the criteria for myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), the 2003 Canadian criteria for ME/CFS, or the comorbid diagnosis of fibromyalgia (FM). One hundred six participants (48 CFS patients diagnosed following the 1994 CDC criteria, 19 MS patients, and 39 healthy controls) completed questionnaires assessing symptom severity, quality of life, daily functioning, and psychological factors. Objective measures consisted of activity monitoring, evaluation of maximal voluntary contraction and muscle recovery, and cognitive performance. CFS patients were screened whether they also fulfilled ME criteria, the Canadian criteria, and the diagnosis of FM. CFS patients scored higher on symptom severity, lower on quality of life, and higher on depression and kinesiophobia and worse on MVC, muscle recovery, and cognitive performance compared to the MS patients and the healthy subjects. Daily activity levels were also lower compared to healthy subjects. Only one difference was found between those fulfilling the ME criteria and those who did not regarding the degree of kinesiophobia (lower in ME), while comorbidity for FM significantly increased the symptom burden. CFS patients report more severe symptoms and are more disabled compared to MS patients and healthy controls. Based on the present study, fulfillment of the ME or Canadian criteria did not seem to give a clinically different picture, whereas a diagnosis of comorbid FM selected symptomatically worse and more disabled patients.
    Clinical Rheumatology 10/2014; DOI:10.1007/s10067-014-2793-x · 1.77 Impact Factor

Full-text (4 Sources)

Available from
May 20, 2014