A pragmatic parallel arm multi-centre randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group-based fatigue management programme (FACETS) for people with multiple sclerosis

Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry

Volumn 84, Issue 10, 2013, Pages 1092-1099

  Thomas, Sarah ^a   Thomas, Peter W ^a   Kersten, Paula ^b   Jones, Rosemary ^c   Green, Colin ^d   Nock, Alison ^e   Slingsby, Vicky ^e   Smith, Angela Davies ^c   Baker, Roger ^a   Galvin, Kathleen T ^f   Hillier, Charles ^e  

^a BOURNEMOUTH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b AUCKLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (New Zealand)

^c FRENCHAY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF EXETER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^e POOLE HOSPITAL NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITY OF HULL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; CURRENT LOCAL PRACTICE; DISEASE SEVERITY; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; EUROQOL 5 DIMENSIONS QUESTIONNAIRE; FATIGUE; FATIGUE APPLYING COGNITIVE BEHAVIOURAL AND ENERGY EFFECTIVENESS TECHNIQUES TO LIFESTYLE; FATIGUE ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS FATIGUE SELF EFFICACY; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS IMPACT SCALE; PHYSICAL CAPACITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SELF CONCEPT; SHORT FORM 6 DIMENSIONS QUESTIONNAIRE;

EID: 84884587184     PISSN: 00223050     EISSN: 1468330X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp-2012-303816     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Krupp LB, Serafin DJ, Christodoulouu C. Multiple sclerosis-associated fatigue. Expert Rev Neurother 2010; 10: 1437-47.
2. Branas P, Jordan RE, Fry-Smith A, et al. Treatments for fatigue in multiple sclerosis: a rapid and systematic review. Health Technol Ass 2000; 4: 1-61.
3. Costello K, Harris C. Differential diagnosis and management of fatigue in multiple sclerosis: considerations for the nurse. J Neurosci Nurs 2003; 35: 139-48.
4. Grima DT, Torrance GW, Francis G, et al. Cost and health related quality of life consequences of multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2000; 6: 91-8. (Pubitemid 30218902)
5. White CP, White MB, Russell CS. Invisible and visible symptoms of multiple sclerosis: which are more predictive of health distress? J Neurosci Nurs 2008; 40: 85-95.
6. Bakshi R. Fatigue associated with multiple sclerosis: diagnosis, impact and management. Mult Scler 2003; 9: 219-27. (Pubitemid 36686688)
7. Mathiowetz VG, Matuska KM, Finlayson ML, et al. One-year follow-up to a randomized controlled trial of an energy conservation course for persons with multiple sclerosis. Int J Rehabil Res 2007; 30: 305-13. (Pubitemid 350059467)
8. Blikman LJ, Huisstede BM, Koojimans H, et al. Effectiveness of energy conservation treatment in reducing fatigue in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil Published Online First: 11 Feb 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.01.025
9. Lee D, Newell R, Ziegler L, et al. Treatment of fatigue in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Nurs Pract 2008; 14: 81-93.
10. van Kessel K, Moss-Morris R: Understanding multiple sclerosis fatigue: a synthesis of biological and psychological factors. J Psychosom Res 2006; 61: 583-5. (Pubitemid 44647257)
11. van Kessel K, Moss-Morris R, Willoughby E, et al. A Randomized controlled trial of cognitive behavior therapy for multiple sclerosis fatigue. Psychosom Med 2008; 70: 205-13. (Pubitemid 351252969)
12. Thomas PW, Thomas S, Hillier C, et al. Psychological interventions for multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; 1:CD004431. doi: 10.1002/14651858. CD004431.pub2
13. Thomas S, Thomas PW, Nock A, et al. Development and preliminary evaluation of a cognitive behavioural approach to fatigue management in people with multiple sclerosis. Patient Educ Couns 2010; 78;204-10.
14. Thomas PW, Thomas S, Kersten P, et al. Multi-centre parallel arm randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group-based cognitive behavioural approach to managing fatigue in people with multiple sclerosis BMC Neurol 2010; 10: 43.
15. Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, et al.; for the CONSORT group. Extending the CONSORT Statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2008; 148: 295-309. (Pubitemid 351665487)
16. Krupp LB, LaRocca NG, Muir-Nash J, et al. The fatigue severity scale. Application to patients with multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus erythematosus. Arch Neurol 1989; 10: 1121-3. (Pubitemid 19246303)
17. NHS Careers. Pay and benefits for AHP staff. http://www.nhscareers.nhs. uk/exploreby- career/allied-health-professions/pay-and-benefits-for-ahp-staff/ (accessed 30 Dec 2012).
18. Schwartz JE, Jandorf L, Krupp L. The measurement of fatigue: a new instrument. J Psychosom Res 1993; 37: 753-62. (Pubitemid 23285135)
19. Hobart JC, Riazi A, Lamping D, et al. Improving the evaluation of therapeutic interventions in multiple sclerosis: development of a patient-based measure of outcome. Health Technol Assess 2004; 8: 1-60.
20. Schwartz CE, Coulthard-Morris L, Zeng Q, et al. Measuring self-efficacy in people with multiple sclerosis: a validation study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 77: 394-8. (Pubitemid 26111758)
21. Hann D, Jacobsen P, Azzarello L, et al. Measurement of fatigue in cancer patients: Development and validation of the Fatigue Symptom Inventory. Qual Life Res 1998; 7: 301-10. (Pubitemid 28207019)
22. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP: The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Neurol Scand 1983; 67: 361-70. (Pubitemid 13098606)
23. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item Short-Form health survey (SF-36):I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30: 473-83.
24. Dolan P. Modeling Valuations for EuroQol Health States. Med Care 1997; 35: 1095-108. (Pubitemid 127453463)
25. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002; 21: 271-92. (Pubitemid 34143147)
26. Ryan CG, Grant PM, Tigbe WW, et al. The validity and reliability of a novel activity monitor as a measure of walking. Br J Sports Med 2006; 40: 779-84. (Pubitemid 44351912)
27. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd edn. Hillsdale: NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988.
28. Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life. The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care 2003; 41: 582-92.
29. Goligher EC, Pouchot J, Brant R, et al. Minimal clinically important difference for 7 measures of fatigue in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 2008; 35: 635-42. (Pubitemid 351500059)
30. Bauer DJ, Sterba SK, Hallford DD. Evaluating group based interventions when control participants are ungrouped. Multivar Behav Res 2008; 43: 210-36.
31. Lane P. Handling drop-out in longitudinal clinical trials: a comparison of the LOCF and MMRM approaches. Pharm Stat 2008; 7: 93-106. (Pubitemid 351943638)
32. Brazier JE, Ratcliffe J, Salomon A, et al. Measuring and valuing health for economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
33. Manca A, Hawkins N, Sculpher M. Estimating mean QALYs in trial-based cost effectiveness analysis: the importance of controlling for baseline utility. Health Econ 2005; 4: 87-496.
34. Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care. Personal social services research unit (PSSRU), Canterbury. UK: University of Kent, 2010.
35. Department of Health. NHS Reference Costs 2009-2010, 2011. http://www.dh.gov. uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/ PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH-123459 (accessed 30 Dec 2012).
36. CONSORT Statement website. http://www.consort-statement.org/consort- statement/13-19-results/item15-baseline-data/(accessed 7 Mar 2013).
37. Altman DG, Doré CJ. Randomisation and baseline comparisons in clinical trials. Lancet 1990; 335: 149-53. (Pubitemid 20032736)
38. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London, UK: NICE, June 2008.
39. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Guidelines for preparing submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (Version 4.3). Barton, Australia: Australian Government. Department of Health and Ageing, December 2008.
40. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies: Canada, 3rd edn. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2006.
41. Hemmett L, Holmes J, Barnes M, et al. What drives quality of life in multiple sclerosis? Q J Med 2004; 97: 671-6. (Pubitemid 39359325)
42. Hobart J, Freeman J, Lamping D, et al. The SF-36 in multiple sclerosis: why assumptions must be tested. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2001; 71: 363-93.
43. Opara JA, Jaracz K, Brola W. Quality of life in multiple sclerosis. J Med Life 2010; 3: 352-8.
44. Fisk JD, Brown MG, Sketris IS, et al. A comparison of health utility measures for the evaluation of multiple sclerosis treatments. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2005; 76: 58-63. (Pubitemid 40013492)
45. Hawton A, Green C, Telford C, et al. Using the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale in treatment decision-making: Mapping from the MSIS-29 version 2 to the EQ-5D and the SF-6D. Value Health 2012; 15: 1084-91.