Patients with chronic fatigue syndrome could be "harmed rather than helped" by a "flawed" review which concluded that graded exercise therapy was unsafe, according to researchers.
A new evaluation has re-opened a long-running controversy over what interventions doctors should prescribe for patients suffering from chronic fatigue syndrome, also known as ME.
Landmark guidance published in 2021 by NICE - the body which advises on clinical practice for England and Wales - said graded exercise therapy (GET) should no longer be recommended.
It also revised its position on cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), saying it should only be used to manage symptoms and distress - not to aid recovery.
READ MORE: Long Covid, Awakenings, and the enigma of post-viral illness
Instead, NICE recommended energy management - known as "pacing" - which advises patients on how to best to ration activity levels in order not to aggravate symptoms.
The U-turn - reversing 2007 guidance - was hailed as a victory by campaigners who warned that it was dangerous for a majority of patients and had caused symptoms to worsen, instead of improve.
In February this year, the Scottish Government partially incorporated the NICE update into its own policy document for ME-CFS treatment, known as the Scottish Good Practice Statement.
However, the row has been reignited by a new review of the 2021 NICE guidance, published in the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry.
The study, co-led by researchers from the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience at King’s College London with input from more than 50 international specialists - including academics from Edinburgh University's Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences - described the 2021 guidance as "problematic".
They state: "It is difficult to understand the disconnect between the initial 2007 guideline that recommended CBT and GET, for which the research evidence has strengthened over the following decade, and the recent guideline that removes GET, qualifies CBT and replaces them with ‘energy management’, for which there is little evidence.
"We are concerned that this new guideline will effectively deny clinicians the ability to offer GET and evidence based CBT to those patients who want them and risks perpetuating chronic ill health and disability."
NICE has rejected the findings and promises a "detailed response".
READ MORE: Warning over 'tidal wave' of post-pandemic ME
It is estimated that there are around 20,000 people in Scotland living with ME/CFS, a post-viral condition which is characterised by chronic long-term symptoms including debilitating fatigue, muscle pain, brain fog, and insomnia.
Although symptoms can fluctuate over time, there is no cure and many patients are bedbound.
The new analysis claims that the 2021 NICE review was riddled with flaws.
These include using a definition of ME/CFS - as "post-exertional symptom exacerbation" - which had not been mandatory in previous studies, and "ignoring" treatment outcomes from some previous trials.
In addition, the researchers said that the 2021 review "prioritised evidence from qualitative studies and patient organised surveys" to conclude that GET causes harm.
However, they state that "rigorously conducted systematic reviews, which included gold standard randomised controlled trials, found no evidence that GET caused harm".
They add: "Having downgraded the evidence for trials of CBT and GET, NICE recommended the use of 'energy management', in which patients are encouraged to stay within the energy limits imposed by their illness, also known as pacing.
"But there is little or no evidence to support such an approach.
"The only substantial trial of pacing for CFS/ME published to date showed that such an approach was no more effective than specialist medical care alone and less effective than either CBT or GET."
READ MORE: Dundee long Covid clinic 'utterly overwhelmed' by demand
Paul Garner, a co-author on the review and professor emeritus of evidence synthesis in global health at the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, said: “Taking all these errors leads to one conclusion: that NICE has not followed international standards for guideline development, which has led to guidance that could harm rather than help patients.
"The implications of this are complicated.
"The flaws really do shake the credibility of this 2021 update of the NICE guideline for CFS/ME”.
A spokesman for NICE said: “We reject entirely the conclusions drawn by the authors of this analysis, and in particular their conclusion that NICE has not followed international standards for guideline development which has led to guidance that could harm rather than help patients.
"In developing our guideline, as well as bringing together the best available scientific evidence, we also listened to the real, lived experience and testimony of people with ME/CFS to produce a balanced guideline which has their wellbeing at its heart.
"We will provide a detailed response to this analysis and in the meantime we are confident that system partners and the ME/CFS community will continue to work together to make sure the important recommendations in our guideline are implemented.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel