Germany: 2022 Society for General and Family Medicine (DEGAM) Fatigue Guideline

Pustekuchen

Established Member (Voting Rights)
Copied post
The German Society for General and Family Medicine (DEGAM) published its new guideline on "Fatigue". One chapter is about ME/CFS.

https://www.degam.de/files/Inhalte/Leitlinien-Inhalte/Dokumente/DEGAM-S3-Leitlinien/053-002_Leitlinie Muedigkeit/Aktualisierung Dezember 2022/Langfassung Leitlinie Müdigkeit.pdf

They seem to follow and explicitly recommend the NICE and EUROMENE guidelines, as well as the CDC's recommendations.
Though they refrain from providing "a DEGAM guideline in the true sense of word" (because of the "complex situation, the relative rarity of the disease among all causes of unaccustomed fatigue, and the dynamic of unusual fatigue and the dynamic development of research").

The "guideline" will be valid until 12/2027. What really strikes me is a minority report (special vote) by
  • German College for Psychosomatic Medicine (DKPM)
  • German Society for Psychosomatic Medicine and Medical Psychotherapy (DGPM)
  • German society for Internal Medicine (DGIM)
  • German Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Neurology (DGPPN)
On 2-3 pages (p.63 onwards) they were allowed to describe their usual horrific babble.

For example
"However, in the opinion of the undersigned professional societies, patients with CFS should be offered staged activation and suitable psychotherapy methods after careful examination and indication, and iatrogenic passivation and chronification should be avoided."

Criticising the NICE guideline they write "Furthermore, Flottorp et al. describe (after consensus was reached) : "that polemical interactions became a battle within the guideline committee, that three members withdrew from guideline development, and that the remaining members did not accept the concerns of leading medical societies"."

Below their special vote (in bold):
"Note: Patient advocacy groups (on ME/CFS) and representatives of EUROMENE are scientifically critical of this special vote and fear harm to affected persons."


Edit: Once again, thank you to all involved with the NICE guideline. I don't want to imagine how screwed we'd be if the NICE guideline were different.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But the NICE guidelines aren't for fatigue.

A tiny step forward, but somehow still a mess. This is separate from whatever IQWIG is doing, right?

It's kind of notable that a small minority of contrarian ideologues held a tantrum, then got cited by people throwing their own tantrum as evidence that their tantrum is, somehow, credible. And cited another group of randos doing the same elsewhere. Without any evidence whatsoever, only their opinion.

Intelligence is completely wasted without wisdom. Same for healthcare without humanity.
 
What really strikes me is a minority report (special vote) by
  • German College for Psychosomatic Medicine (DKPM)
  • German Society for Psychosomatic Medicine and Medical Psychotherapy (DGPM)
  • German society for Internal Medicine (DGIM)
  • German Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Neurology (DGPPN)
On 2-3 pages (p.63 onwards) they were allowed to describe their usual horrific babble.

For example
"However, in the opinion of the undersigned professional societies, patients with CFS should be offered staged activation and suitable psychotherapy methods after careful examination and indication, and iatrogenic passivation and chronification should be avoided."

Only able to skim now but it seems that their 'special vote' is only included in the long version of the guideline. So neither the short version nor the short versions/ 'modules' for patients and/or health care professionals included any of the claims made by the authors of the 'special vote'.

Instead, if I didn't miss anything, in the diverse short versions of the guideline all the parts dealing with ME/CFS or explicitly excluding pwME from recommendations seem to largely follow NICE.

E.g, in the guideline for patients:

"In the case of ME/CFS* - which stands for myalgic encephalomyelitis (or myalgic fatigue syndrome)/chronic fatigue syndrome* - which is a disease in its own right and should be distinguished from the symptom of 'fatigue', a prolonged deterioration of the condition occurs after physical and/or mental exertion, so that here the activities must not be increased above the limits[*] currently present in the affected person: here the otherwise helpful advice to increase activity is not useful and can permanently and irretrievably worsen the condition."

[*] in German: 'Belastungsgrenze'

(Link to overview of diverse versions/ modules of the guideline )
 
Last edited:
Criticising the NICE guideline they write "Furthermore, Flottorp et al. describe (after consensus was reached) : "that polemical interactions became a battle within the guideline committee, that three members withdrew from guideline development, and that the remaining members did not accept the concerns of leading medical societies"."

The DEGAM guideline report states that the special vote was only accepted to be included in the guideline after the authors had edited their text. Among other things, maybe they had to add the "after consensus was reached" to the Flottorp et al reference?

Sorry not able to check myself now but if I remember correctly Flottorp et al insinuated that the resignations from the committee were before consensus was reached?

Forum thread on the Flottorp et al letter here.

Anyway, even without context the reference doesn't make sense with the parenthesis as the date of the resignations ("after consensus was reached") doesn't support the idea that the people who resigned had anything to complain about if they all agreed on the guideline before the resignations.

It's strange that they "withdrew from guideline development" when the only thing left to do was the technical publication of the consented guideline with maybe some minor language edits.

See also the documentation of the NICE guideline process ( https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng206/history )

From the round table minutes, https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng206/documents/minutes-31, p.3 :


Peter Barry presented a summary of how guideline development proceeded:

"The whole guideline was agreed by the committee, including the recommendations on graded exercise therapy (GET) before there were resignations."

"The recommendations were not decided on by voting, they were reached by consensus. Reaching consensus was a careful and iterative process."


Date of resignations : https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng206/documents/committee-member-list-3

Once again, thank you to all involved with the NICE guideline. I don't want to imagine how screwed we'd be if the NICE guideline were different.
I echo-echo that. Also, thank you to the German patient organizations involved in the DEGAM guidelines.


(Pretty brain-fogged ATM and took me several hours over two days to put these posts together so anticipated apologies for any potential muddle.)
 
Last edited:
But the NICE guidelines aren't for fatigue.
Only the chapter about ME/CFS is referencing the NICE ME/CFS guideline. Sorry for the slight confusion.

This is separate from whatever IQWIG is doing, right?
Yup, IQWiG is only creating a report about ME/CFS for the ministry of health. It's not a guideline, but it appears the draft was sometimes received as such.
(On Mastodon IQWiG recently announced to change the report to make sure their benefit assessments won't lead to therapies being received as "IQWiG recommended". But, we'll see.)

Also, thank you to the German patient organizations involved in the DEGAM guidelines
+1!!

Despite the minority vote, the new guideline is a huge improvement over the old one.
 
Last edited:
The German Society for General and Family Medicine (DEGAM) published its new guideline on "Fatigue". One chapter is about ME/CFS.

https://www.degam.de/files/Inhalte/Leitlinien-Inhalte/Dokumente/DEGAM-S3-Leitlinien/053-002_Leitlinie Muedigkeit/Aktualisierung Dezember 2022/Langfassung Leitlinie Müdigkeit.pdf

They seem to follow and explicitly recommend the NICE and EUROMENE guidelines, as well as the CDC's recommendations.
Though they refrain from providing "a DEGAM guideline in the true sense of word" (because of the "complex situation, the relative rarity of the disease among all causes of unaccustomed fatigue, and the dynamic of unusual fatigue and the dynamic development of research").

The "guideline" will be valid until 12/2027. What really strikes me is a minority report (special vote) by
  • German College for Psychosomatic Medicine (DKPM)
  • German Society for Psychosomatic Medicine and Medical Psychotherapy (DGPM)
  • German society for Internal Medicine (DGIM)
  • German Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Neurology (DGPPN)
On 2-3 pages (p.63 onwards) they were allowed to describe their usual horrific babble.

For example
"However, in the opinion of the undersigned professional societies, patients with CFS should be offered staged activation and suitable psychotherapy methods after careful examination and indication, and iatrogenic passivation and chronification should be avoided."

Criticising the NICE guideline they write "Furthermore, Flottorp et al. describe (after consensus was reached) : "that polemical interactions became a battle within the guideline committee, that three members withdrew from guideline development, and that the remaining members did not accept the concerns of leading medical societies"."

Below their special vote (in bold):
"Note: Patient advocacy groups (on ME/CFS) and representatives of EUROMENE are scientifically critical of this special vote and fear harm to affected persons."


Edit: Once again, thank you to all involved with the NICE guideline. I don't want to imagine how screwed we'd be if the NICE guideline were different.

Interesting for them to lean on the Flottorp piece in that way when there are so many problems with it.

What was that website that was meant to be good for translating more technical documents?
 

Thanks.

I forgot you had to pay, but ended up translating a lot in little bits. I've not done much editing, so this sounds very roboty, but may be of interest to some others. If anyone goes through correcting bits it could be worth reposting?

I started at the ME/CFS [5.7] bit and then went on for a bit after that. I expect this will be multiple posts:

5.7 Myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy)/.
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS)
This section explains a thematically relevant clinical picture for the primary care sector.
relevant clinical picture, which is classified in ICD-10 as a disease of the nervous system under G93.3 and in ICD-
11 under 8E49 under postviral fatigue syndrome and synonymous with myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME).
lomyelitis (ME). In the international literature, the dual acronym
ME/CFS has become established. Since there is no certainty of an inflammatory central nervous process, it is

Aids to Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de56

also alternatively used the term myalgic encephalopathy [20] https://www.
nice.org.uk/guidance/ng206.
Given the complexities of the situation, the relative rarity of the condition among all causes of
of unaccustomed fatigue and the dynamic development of research, we refrain from
a DEGAM guideline in the narrow sense. For more detailed information, we recommend referring to the current
NICE guideline as well as the guideline of the European Network for ME/CFS (EUROMENE)
and the recommendations of the Center of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which are essentially based on the report of the expert commission.
essentially based on the report of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) Expert Committee [21,387].
[21,387]. In Germany, the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQW) is currently working on a report.
(IQWIG) is currently preparing a report on ME on behalf of the Federal Ministry of Health (BMG).
(BMG), but it will not be published until early 2023.
A recent study by EUROMENE indicates that lack of knowledge and understanding of ME/CFS among physicians is a problem.
understanding of ME/CFS are widespread among physicians, and delays in di-
agnosis are associated with severe and protracted disease [388].
5.7.1 Definition and diagnosis
Different diagnostic criteria, some of which are quite comprehensive, have been used in the past.
have been used in the past, which have included different patients, which makes a comparative
comparative evaluation of clinical studies difficult [387]. Therefore, simple diagnostic criteria were proposed by the
IOM in 2015 proposed simple diagnostic criteria that capture core symptoms and are useful as a
Screening useful in primary care [387].
IOM criteria for ME/CFS (IOM 2015).

The following three persistently present (at least half the time) symptoms are present:
1 A substantial limitation, compared with the pre-disease period, in the ability to
to occupational, educational, social, or personal activities that persists for more than 6 mo-
accompanied by fatigue that is profound, new, not lifelong, and not the result of the disease.
not the result of excessive exertion, and is not substantially improved by rest and recuperation.
rest and recovery.

2 Worsening of symptoms after physical and/or cognitive exertion.
(post-exertional malaise: PEM).

3 Non-restorative sleep

Aids to Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de57

Mandatory is also the presence of at least one of the following two symptoms:
1 Cognitive impairment ("brain fog")*.
2 Orthostatic intolerance**
*Cognitive impairments are disorders of memory, attention,
information and stimulus processing (slowing down) and psychomotor function.
tion.
** Orthostatic intolerance (OI) is a form of dysautonomia: in the upright position, symptoms such as dizziness, vertigo
symptoms such as dizziness, lightheadedness, visual disturbances, tachycardia, pal-
pitations, weakness and pallor; this improves when lying down.
Because the diagnosis of ME/CFS is often incorrectly used to describe other conditions that are associated with chronic fatigue, the diagnosis of ME/CFS is often incorrectly used to describe other conditions that are associated with chronic fatigue.
fatigue and is perceived by patients as misleading with regard to the severity of the disease.
the severity of the disease, the IOM also proposed the term "systemic stress intolerance.
systemic exertion intolerance disease" (SEID), but this term has not yet been accepted by patients.
SEID, which has not yet gained acceptance over the established acronym ME/CFS.
established acronym. The term SEID takes into account the cardinal symptom of post-exertional malaise (PEM).
account for. PEM is defined as a prolonged worsening of symptoms after
mild exertion (minor daily stress). For the criterion PEM, a sym-
deterioration that persists for at least the next day after the exertion or longer.
longer.
Internationally, the Canadian Consensus Criteria (CCC) are the most commonly used criteria.
Criteria (CCC) are most commonly used internationally for diagnosis in secondary care of adult patients
and in research, as also recommended by EUROMENE [21]. In the case of CCC
In addition to the criteria required in the IOM, fatigue, PEM, and sleep disturbances
or nonrestorative sleep, must also include pain, neurologic/cognitive dysfunction, and at least-
at least one other symptom from two of the categories (a) autonomic, (b) neuroendocrine
and (c) immunological manifestations. These categories include other
including the common gastrointestinal symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome, irritable bowel syndrome
in terms of irritable bowel syndrome, orthostatic intolerance, flu-like sensations, subfebrile temperatures,
sore throat, painful lymph nodes, hypersensitivity to external stimuli, increasing allergies, and frequent
increasing allergies, and frequent and prolonged respiratory infections. For minors
the CCC have been adapted. Currently, in pediatrics, the diagnostic criteria of Rowe
[389] and Jason [390], respectively, and colleagues.
The IOM and CCC criteria can be downloaded in German translation from the website of the Charité Fatigue Centre (CFC).
translation on the website of the Charité Fatigue Centre (CFC). There you can also find for the assessment of
functional limitation and a questionnaire for the assessment of PEM: ht-
tps://cfc.charite.de. Likewise, a questionnaire developed by MCFC (TU Munich)
and CFC (Charité Berlin) (Munich-Berlin-Symptom-Questi-

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de58

onnaire, MBSQ) can be downloaded, with which for adults the IOM criteria and the
CCC, and for children and adolescents the IOM, CCC, Rowe, and Jason criteria are checked.
[389,390].
Canadian consensus criteria (CCC) for ME/CFS [391].
The symptoms listed below have been present for at least 6 months in adults
(3 months in children and adolescents) persistently or recurrently.
If other conditions exhibit the same symptoms, these conditions must first be
investigated and treated optimally before a diagnosis of ME/CFS can be made.
Other conditions must be ruled out by a combination of clinical history, physical examination
physical examination and complementary tests.
n a significant degree of new-onset, unexplained, persistent or recurring
fatigue, which significantly reduces the level of activity.
significantly reduced
n worsening of symptoms after light exertion until at least the next day (post-exertion)
next day (post-exertional malaise=PEM)
n sleep disturbances or unrestful sleep
n Pain (muscles, head and/or joints)
n Cognitive symptoms (at least two symptoms from a given list).
In addition, at least one symptom from two categories is required:
n Autonomic manifestations
n Neuroendocrine manifestations
n Immunological manifestations
NICE explains the multiple sleep disorders, which can include the following:
n non-restorative sleep, feeling debilitated, flu-like feeling and stiffness on
Waking up
n interrupted or shallow sleep, altered sleep patterns and/or rhythms, or
Hypersomnia

Aids to Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de59

Thus, daytime sleepiness rather than classic insomnia is typically present [22].
There is also overlap with post covid syndrome. In this regard, we refer to
the living guideline on this topic https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/020-027.html.
 
5.7.2 Epidemiology and prognosis

To date, there are insufficient epidemiological studies in Europe, EURO-
MENE estimates a prevalence of 0.1 to 0.7% and an incidence of 0.015 per 1,000 patien- terns [21,392].
patient-years [21,392]. The most recent estimate from the United States is a prevalence of 0.42% [393].
393]. Only if ME/CFS is diagnosed in Germany according to the international standard
standard, its prevalence and health economic impact can be determined in Germany.
be determined. Women are twice as likely as men to be affected [394], people living alone
and those with low incomes are disproportionately affected [395]. In primary care
less than 2% of the population with primary unexplained fatigue are classified as having ME/CFS [73].
[73]. Thus, patients fulfilling the ME/CFS criteria are rare in the individual family practice.
rare in the individual family practice. According to international studies, 84-91% of ME/CFS patients have not yet been
undiagnosed or misdiagnosed [387]. As a result of COVID
significantly more patients with ME/CFS may present to primary care practices [396].
Overall, a very protracted, often chronic course must be expected [21,397].
[21,397]. Approximately 60% of patients present with changing, fluctuating symptoms [398-400].

Patients with ME/CFS predominantly have a poorer quality of life than patients with other chronic diseases [401,212].
patients with other chronic diseases [401,402]. Both a shortened life expectancy
shortened life expectancy [328] and an increased risk of suicide [403]. A
The majority is no longer able to work or attend school. There
there is a high need for help [404].
A quarter are housebound or bedridden due to symptoms [387].
NICE describes four levels of severity (mild, moderate, severe, and very severe): moderate
Affected individuals are usually no longer able to work, very severely affected individuals are
bedridden and dependent on nursing care. They are no longer able to speak and, in some cases, have to be
chen and in some cases have to be fed artificially. ME/CFS is a reason for
long absences from school [405]. In young patients, early diagnosis with appropriate energy management (pacing) is essential.
management (pacing) and psychosocial support is associated with a better prognosis.
associated with a better prognosis. However, a protracted course is also established in the majority of minors [389,406].
course [389,406].

5.7.3 Etiology
The exact cause of the disease has not yet been determined. As a cause, virological,
immunological, autonomic-neurological, environmental and psychiatric-psychological factors.

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de60

gical hypotheses have been postulated. ME/CFS is considered by EUROMENE [21] and CDC to be a
multisystem disease, with dysregulation of the immune system, the nervous sys-
system, and cellular energy metabolism. In infection-triggered ME/CFS (approximately 70% of
of cases), there is now evidence for a role of autoantibodies against G protein-coupled receptors (GPC).
receptors (GPCR) and vascular dysfunction with hypoperfusion of muscle and brain.
muscles and brain, which increases under stress [407-409]. To date, however, there is no
diagnostic test that proves the presence of ME/CFS [20] https://www.nice.org.uk/
guidance/ng206.
In most patient:s, the disease begins with an infection, usually a nonspe- cific respiratory infection [20].
respiratory tract infection [410]. A clustered occurrence is seen as a result of infectious mo-
nonucleosis (up to 40% of ME/CFS cases in children and adolescents) [411], as well as diseases caused by coronaviruses.
coronaviruses, enteroviruses, influenza, dengue virus or lamblia, Q fever and Lyme borreliosis.
and Lyme disease have been described. Patients often report concomitant events such as stress, psychological distress
stress, psychological strain, surgery or an accident with cervical spine injury,
sometimes as the sole trigger [22,395,404,412,413] https://www.awmf.org/leitlini-
en/detail/ll/020-027.html. In general, it can be assumed that those individuals who
criteria for ME/CFS represent a heterogeneous group in terms of etiology, pathogenesis, and prognosis.
heterogeneous group.
5.7.4 Approach, care situation
The medical care situation for ME/CFS sufferers in Germany and worldwide is
problematic in Germany and worldwide [388,414]. Currently, only two university outpatient clinics in Germany specialize in ME/CFS.
specialized in ME/CFS. Due to their capacity, both outpatient clinics have a
regional focus of care. The Charité Fatigue Centrum (CFC) in Berlin treats
adult patients from Berlin and Brandenburg. In the MRI Chronic Fatigue Centrum
for young people (MCFC) of the Polyclinic for Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine at the Klinikum Rechts
of the Isar of the Technical University of Munich (TUM), patients from Bavaria up to the age of
up to the age of 25. The general practitioners are left alone with the mostly seriously ill
patients [21,415]. In this situation, when ME/CFS is suspected, it is necessary to
the CCC criteria described above are indicated. In orthostatic intolerance
postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) is found in some of the patients.
(POTS) with an increase in pulse rate in standing position of > 30/min compared with the resting heart
rate or a rate > 120 during standing. A Schellong test or the NASA lean test
(see 4.2.13) is used for verification in this case [416]. For differentiation from other diseases
the general diagnostic procedure given in this guideline is recommended. There is a lack of
evidence whether further examinations, without indicative findings in the diagnosis of Ba-
sis diagnostics of fatigue, to a relevant extent uncover previously undiscovered specific treat- able causes.
specifically treatable causes. In this context, there is a high need for research.
CFC and MCFC offer regular training and information material on dealing with ME/CFS.
with the disease ME/CFS.

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de61

Both before and after ME/CFS diagnosis (for 10 years each), a significantly increased
symptom burden and utilization of medical services is observed, and in the year of diagnosis a
significant peak beyond that [417]. This is less pronounced with care coordinated by primary care physicians in Germany.
care in Germany than in the case of uncoordinated care [418].
People with ME/CFS often complain about a poor care situation [419-421].
Only a quarter of people with ME/CFS report that they are treated by doctors who specialize in ME/CFS [414].
specialized in ME/CFS [414].
A persistent discrepancy between the assessment of patients and their physicians can lead to considerable conflict situations [419-421].
situations [422,423] and should therefore be resolved in clarifying discussions.
should be resolved in clarifying discussions. Regardless of the discussion of etiology and nosology, in the
individual with severe fatigue symptoms, positive acceptance of the person and understanding of the
and understanding of the impairment caused by the symptom is of great importance.
tion. Under no circumstances should the symptoms be dismissed as imaginary or similar, nor should a cure be promised.
be promised. As with other presumptions of diagnosis by the patient, the suggestion of a
the suggestion of ME/CFS openly and positively. If the involvement of the
If it is necessary to involve the specialist level of treatment, attention should be paid to integrated psychosocial and somatic care.
social and somatic care.
NICE reports that people with ME/CFS may have experienced prejudice and disbelief
and may feel misunderstood by people who do not understand their disease (including family,
friends, and health and social care professionals and teachers).
may feel stigmatized. This should be considered in the conversation.
Patients with ME/CFS and their family members or caregivers (as appropriate) should be
Be made aware of current information on ME/CFS as soon as it is suspected. The
information should be tailored to the circumstances of the individual, including their symptoms, the
including their symptoms, the severity of their disease, and how long they have had ME/CFS.
sufferers. Regular enquiries should be made as to whether further information or discussion is required and whether complementary
and whether complementary treatments are being used [20]. In particular, the risks and side
side effects of untested therapies should be pointed out. Self-pay services such
self-paying drugs or supplements should be tested for tolerability and evidence and, if necessary
evidence and, if necessary, should be critically commented on.
No drugs have yet been approved for the causal treatment of ME/CFS. According to
EUROMENE, the CDC, and NICE, consistent energy management through pacing is an important
management through pacing is an important component of treatment. Pacing is the maintenance of an individually
individual level of exertion so that overload and worsening of symptoms due to PEM are avoided.
worsening of symptoms through PEM. At the same time, the aim is to
tolerable load is made possible. This procedure has been called "energy envelope" [406]
or "energy management" [20]. The aim is to determine the level of stress that can be tolerated by
without worsening symptoms, and activity is initially limited to this level.
limited to this level. The aim is to avoid "flare-ups" of symptoms induced by overload.
avoid. As soon as a "flare up" occurs, activity should be reduced [20]. Ideally

Aids to Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de62


an improvement can be achieved by consistent pacing. The "energy manage-
ment" is not curative, but serves disease management. What is important here is
and empathic support of the patients, also with the support of ME/CFS trained
by physiotherapists trained in ME/CFS. Information for patients on pa-
cing can be found at https://cfc.charite.de.
In its guideline, NICE points out that gradual activation therapies, as well as activa-
therapies based on models of deconditioning or avoidance of movement should no longer be offered.
should no longer be offered. Behavioral therapies that are based on models of a
of "false illness beliefs" should also not be offered, according to NICE.
Similarly, generalized activity or exercise programs should not be recommended,
as these may worsen symptoms. The CDC points out that aerobic
exercise, which is helpful in many other chronic diseases, is not tolerated by patients with ME/CFS.
ME/CFS are not tolerated. These recommendations are based primarily on qualitative data.
data. The evidence base for therapeutic strategies is consistently reported by NICE as weak to very weak.
weak. For discussion of the NICE recommendations, see special vote under
5.7.5 and scientifically based replications in the guideline report at 4.3.
It is essential for practice to consider the type and level of activity to aim for in
with the patient's needs, abilities, and exercise limits.
individualized approach is advisable. It is also important to inquire about and
and, if necessary, treatment of concomitant, often very distressing symptoms such as pain, cardiovascular
cardiovascular complaints and sleep disorders is part of the treatment concept.
[21,410,415,424].
Described is a lowered pain threshold in individuals with ME/CFS and a frequent
overlap with fibromyalgia [425]. Regarding general approaches, especially
pain management, we therefore refer to the guideline Chronic Pain [426] , among others.
https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/053-036.html, whereby in each case the in-
In each case, the individual stress intolerance with PEM must be taken into account.
According to NICE, the disease is often so severe that it can lead to a significant need for care and disability.
and disability. Aids that may be necessary depending on the stage and severity of the disease include
may be necessary include compression stockings, wheelchair, stair lift [20]. Also
Relatives also often need support and advice.
Through individually adapted symptom-oriented therapy, stress reduction and pacing
stabilization and improvement can occur, but the course of most patients is chronic and
chronic and relapses are not uncommon [406,427-430].
To be distinguished are findings in people with chronic fatigue without PEM: several stu-
Several studies on chronic fatigue, which, however, hardly included subjects with PEM, who thus did not meet the
diagnostic criteria for ME/CFS, and a Cochrane review [164] showed
Improvements under aerobic exercise [431,432]. A systematic review that included pati-

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de63

divided into three groups according to the criteria "without PEM/facultative PEM/obligate PEM" sees a low benefit in the first two groups.
the first two groups a small benefit, in the third group - which, however, consisted of only one study - practically no benefit.
consisted of only one study - virtually no benefit from physiotherapy [48].
Also effective for chronic fatigue are cognitive-behavioral techniques [433-435].
However, the studies cited here refer only to patients who predominantly,
but not exclusively PEM with otherwise given ME/CFS criteria. When considering the
When considering the subgroup with PEM, there was no clear effect in any treatment arm.
 
5.7.5 - the 'special' comment.

Apparently this is what the acronyms are for:
  • German College for Psychosomatic Medicine (DKPM)
  • German Society for Psychosomatic Medicine and Medical Psychotherapy (DGPM)
  • German society for Internal Medicine (DGIM)
  • German Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Neurology (DGPPN)
5.7.5 Special vote DKPM, DGPM, DGIM, DGPPN on ME/CFS

The neutral term "Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS)" used in the previous version of the guideline for patients with pronounced and chronic fatigue is undisputed. The designation "ME/CFS" ("ME" for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis or Myalgic Encephal-lomyelopathy), on the other hand, implies an organic disease, namely an inflammation or disease of the brain and spinal cord. This can initially provide understandable relief for those affected, especially if they have previously experienced medical disinterest, misjudgement or even stigmatization as "patients", or even stigmatization as "mentally ill".

The historically less distinctively originated designation "ME" can be misleadingly understood [McEvedy and Beard 1970, Shorter 1993]. Given multiple findings on the "nocebo" effect [Colloca and Barsky 2020], there is a likelihood that the diagnostic label of a possibly irreversible or progressive CNS disease, which may have been triggered by a previous viral disease, is likely to be prognostically unfavorable.

Negative expectations with corresponding effects on their symptoms, their quality of life and their way of life. In the opinion of the undersigned societies, the term "ME" should not be used/should therefore not be passed on uncritically.

Modern neuropsychobehavioral models of the development of distressing physical complaints and fatigue are not sufficiently addressed in relation to CFS [Hennings-en et al. 2018, Greenhouse-Tucknott et al. 2022]. Thus, from the point of view of the un-signatory professional societies, the guideline does not do justice to the claim of a biopsychosocial medicine. This does not only understand illnesses as biomechanical disorders, but also takes into account individual experiences, life circumstances and behavior patterns. As an example, lifestyle factors in cardiovascular diseases are mentioned, which have both a causal and a
play both a causative and a perpetuating role [Patnode et al. 2022].

The description of CFS as a supposedly broadly recognized "multisystemic disease" is misleading.

We believe, in accordance with guideline recommendation 6.1. ("It should be noted that often several causal health problems have to be assumed and treated.), that the etiology of CFS is multifactorial in the biopsychosocial sense.

The current guideline version conveys the view that CFS is

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de64

a condition distinct from other conditions of increased fatigue (e.g., in the context of organic diseases such as cancer or multiple sclerosis, or also in the context of psychological depressive disorders), which can be distinguished above all by a specific, so-called post exertional malaise (PEM), i.e. a subjectively experienced, more than 24 hours lasting deterioration of the condition after previous
exertion. It is indisputable that PEM can occur after previous exertion, however, this, as well as non-restorative sleep, is insufficiently specific, and is also found, for example, in patients with fibromyalgia, cancer-associated fatigue and other fatigue syndromes. [Nijs et al. 2013, Barhorst et al. 2022, Twomey et al. 2020].

The emphasis on PEM as a specific characteristic of or warning sign for CFS is, according to the assessment of the undersigned professional societies misleading. In the view of the undersigned professional societies, the following are clinically particularly problematic recommendations for therapy or even warnings of worsening:

In the case of "ME/CFS", according to recommendation 6.5 C, no physical activities should be offered on the basis of the deconditioning concept.

A rigid training plan is certainly hardly purposeful. However, according to the assessment of the undersigned professional societies patients with CFS should be offered staged activation and suitable exercise after careful examination and
and indication.

Patients with CFS should be offered staged activation and suitable psychotherapeutic intervention.

Iatrogenic passivation and chronification should be avoided.

That patients with CFS who participated in randomized studies of cognitive behavioral therapy or graded activation therapy rated themselves
improved (44% and 43%) and only a small proportion rated themselves as having worsened (11% and 14%).
[Ingman et al. 2022, White et al. 2021 and S3 guideline "Functional Bodily
per Complaints"].

Strict avoidance of activities can counterproductively lead to loneliness, deconditioning and withdrawal, which can fix and maintain the symptomatology.

Since, in the view of the undersigned professional societies, PEM is not very specific, this recommendation may also have a negative impact on behavior.

Recommendation may also have a negative impact on the behavior, quality of life, health and thus the prognosis of other patients with fatigue, who may fear that they too who may fear that they also suffer from ME/CFS.

Because it is based on "models of a "wrong disease conviction," behavioral therapy should not be used for "ME/CFS," according to the guideline, or only for the treatment of concomitant symptoms. The good evidence for a limited, but clear efficacy of staged activation therapy and cognitive cognitive behavioral therapy in patients with severe CFS, including PEM, is ignored. These and possibly other evidence-based therapies, e.g. MBSR or ACT, should not be ignored.

Interventions should not be withheld from those affected or presented in a fearful manner.

It should be formally pointed out that the repeated and without own evaluation NICE guideline on ME/CFS, which is used to justify various statements in this guideline are justified, is highly problematic from the point of view of the signatory professionals as there are indications that the evidence in this guideline has been incorrectly evaluated and one-sidedly assessed in this guideline. The main points of criticism are as follows [Flottorp

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de65

et al. 2022]:

The creation of a new definition of ME/CFS led to the downgrading of the
most of the available evidence;

trial outcomes were not included at all available time points;

the definition of adverse events/harm ignored data from RCTs and was based
and was based predominantly on low-quality studies;

the importance of subjectively emp- fatigue was invalidated, although it is the main symptom of the syndrome;

Faulty characterization of Graded Exercise Therapy (GET) as a fixed treatment, not adapted to the situation of the affected person, with anecdotal evidence.

In addition, Flottorp et al. describe (post-consensus) : "that polemical interactions have became a battle within the guideline committee, that three members withdrew from guideline guideline development, and the remaining members did not accept the concerns of leading medical societies were not accepted."


Barhorst EE, Boruch AE, Cook DB, Lindheimer JB. Pain-Related Post-Exertional Malaise in Myal-
gic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) and fibromyalgia: A Systematic.
Review and Three-Level Meta-Analysis. Pain Med. 2022; 23(6):1144-1157.
Colloca L, Barsky AJ. Placebo and nocebo effects. N Engl J Med. 2020; 382: 554-561.
Flottorp SA, Brurberg KG, Fink P, Knoop H, Wyller VBB. New NICE guideline on chronic fatigue
syndrome: more ideology than science? Lancet. 2022; 399: 611-613.
Greenhouse-Tucknott A, Butterworth JB, Wrightson JG, Smeeton NJ, Critchley HD, Dekerle J,
Harrison NA. Toward the unity of pathological and exertional fatigue: A predictive processing.
model. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2022; 22: 215-228.
Henningsen P, Gündel H, Kop WJ, Löwe B, Martin A, Rief W, Rosmalen JGM, Schröder A, van
der Feltz-Cornelis C, Van den Bergh O; EURONET-SOMA Group. Persistent Physical Symptoms
as Perceptual Dysregulation: A Neuropsychobehavioral Model and Its Clinical Implications.
Psychosom Med. 2018; 80:422-431.
Ingman T, Smakowski A, Goldsmith K, Chalder T. A systematic literature review of randomized.
controlled trials evaluating prognosis following treatment for adults with chronic fatigue syn-
drome. Psychol Med. 2022 Sep 5:1-13.
Larun L, Brurberg KG, Odgaard-Jensen J, Price JR. Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syn-
drome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 2;10(10):CD003200. doi: 10.1002/14651858.
CD003200.pub8. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 31577366; PMCID: PMC6953363.
McEvedy CP, Beard AW. Concept of benign myalgic encephalomyelitis. Br Med J.
1970;1(5687):11-5.
Nijs J, Roussel N, Van Oosterwijck J, De Kooning M, Ickmans K, Struyf F, Meeus M, Lundberg M. Fear.
of movement and avoidance behavior toward physical activity in chronic-fatigue syndrome and
fibromyalgia: state of the art and implications for clinical practice. Clin Rheumatol. 2013; 32: 1121-9.

Aids for good medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de66

Patnode CD, Redmond N, Iacocca MO, Henninger M. Behavioral Counseling Interventions to.
Promote a Healthy Diet and Physical Activity for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Adults
Without Known Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic
Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. 2022 Jul 26;328(4):375-388.
S3 guideline, "Functional Body Complaints.
https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/051-001.html
Sharpe M, Chalder T, White PD. Evidence-Based Care for People with Chronic Fatigue Syndro-.
me and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis. J Gen Intern Med. 2022 ; 37:449-452.
Shorter E. Chronic fatigue in historical perspective. Ciba Found Symp. 1993;173:6-16; dis-.
cussion 16-22. Twomey R, Yeung ST, Wrightson JG, Millet GY, Culos-Reed SN. Post-exertio-
nal Malaise in People With Chronic Cancer-Related Fatigue. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020;
60:407-416.
White PD, Etherington J. Adverse outcomes in trials of graded exercise therapy for adult pati-
ents with chronic fatigue syndrome. J Psychosom Res. 2021 Aug;147:110533. doi: 10.1016/j.
jpsychores.2021.110533. epub 2021 May 28. PMID: 34091377.


Note: Patient advocacy groups (on ME/CFS) and representatives of EUROMENE
are scientifically critical of this special vote and fear harm to
affected persons. For more details on the special vote and the scientifically based
replications see guideline report chapter 4.3.
 
Last edited:
I skimmed bits of this and found it interesting enough to keep going for a while:

5.8 Common errors and fallacies

Pathological laboratory values are hastily accepted as a sufficient explanation.
In a study of 220 patients complaining of fatigue [28], four cases were diagnosed as subclinical hypothyroidism.
subclinical hypothyroidism. Of these, three could be substituted until normalization of
normalization of TSH, but their fatigue had not improved!
had not improved! Thus, this was the coincidental coincidence of two common
conditions (fatigue and subclinical hypothyroidism). Consequence: critical evaluation of
subjective condition and abnormal findings in the longitudinal course, restrained use of laboratory
laboratory tests and other further diagnostics.

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de67


Physicians first rule out physical causes and only then work on the psychosocial area.
the psychosocial area.
Clear somatic causes are only found in a small proportion of patients or those with primary unexplained causes.
patients with primary unexplained fatigue. An organic clarification process that lasts for weeks
process of organic clarification can, until its conclusion, fixate the conviction in the patient that the
that there is a hidden physical illness as the cause [436].
[436]. This view is very difficult to correct later. Consequence: a psychosocial
psychosocial understanding with the patient at the time of the initial contact; this will be
even in the rare case of a purely somatic explanation of fatigue.
of the doctor-patient relationship, because somatic diseases also have their psychological and social components.
and social components. Patients with excessive daytime sleepiness and proven sleep apnea syndrome
sleep apnea syndrome often also have symptoms of depression [437].
In the case of known chronic diseases, fatigue is hastily related to the disease process itself.
to the disease process itself.
In fact, depression or exhausted mental compensations are,
disturbed sleep, pain, consequences of physical inactivity (deconditioning), thera-
side effects of therapy and interactions between all these factors are at least as important.
These general factors require specific treatment and rehabilitation measures.
bilitation measures. Consequence: apply this guideline consistently to patients with known chronic
known chronic diseases.

Premature labeling
In the case of unspecific disturbances of well-being, which are often accompanied by severe impairment
impairment, the temptation is great for those affected as well as for physicians
to agree hastily on insufficiently substantiated (pseudo) diagnoses. These labels
tions correspond, for example, to biological (iron or vitamin D deficiency, hypotension, hypog- lycemia), environmental
lycemia), environmental (MCS, amalgam exposure, intolerances), infectious (intestinal microbiome, Candida)
(intestinal microbiome, candida) and other hypotheses. What they have in common is that the corresponding
scientifically insufficiently documented or even refuted, not plausible and/or not
plausible and/or not proven in individual cases. However, patients often feel
often feel taken seriously and relieved with such diagnoses. These diagnoses are problematic
problematic if they are one-sidedly somatic or prevent a necessary wait-and-see approach.
of keeping an open mind. Thus they often lead to a narrow perspective for doctors as well as for the patients.
perspective, which disregards complex psychosocial factors and fails to offer appropriate solutions.
psychosocial factors and obstructs appropriate solution options [438], as well as
dangerous courses that can be averted.

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de68

Bogus associations and self-fulfilling prophecies
An illusory association, e.g., of low vitamin D levels and fatigue, may arise when physicians, on the basis of
doctors, on the basis of corresponding convictions, increase the number of determinations
of this laboratory value in patients who complain of fatigue; this will
known patients with low vitamin D levels will increasingly be recruited from this group, even though the
although the non-fatigued patients are just as likely to have such a finding.
have such a finding, but it is not detected [139]. Among the patients with
vitamin D deficiency" diagnosed in this way, the "tired" are more frequently represented, since it is more likely to be
They are more likely to be detected, but not because the low level is the cause of fatigue.
The uncritical "experience" thus confirms the view that leads to selective diagnostics,
is confirmed again and again [439]. If vitamin D is then substituted, place-
the vitamin D deficiency theory, as has been shown for latent iron deficiency [132].
iron deficiency [132].

Fig. 3: What to do: Diagnostics negative, fatigue remains?

[diagram page 68]

6 Therapeutic procedure

6.1 Recommendation (modified 2022)
It should be noted that there are often several
causal health problems must be assumed and
and need to be treated.
Recommend-
degree of recommendation
B
Level of
evidence
II
Result
Consensus procedure
13 Yes
0 no
0 abstentions
Strong consensus
Literature reference: [35-38]
For details, see chapters 4.2.12, 5.4.
6.2 Recommendation (modified 2022).
In the case of unexplained fatigue and/or indications of relevant
relevant psychosocial stress, fixed follow-up appointments should be offered.
fixed follow-up appointments should be offered.
Recommend-
degree of recommendation
A
Level of
evidence
III
Result
Consensus process
13 Yes
0 no
0 abstentions
Strong consensus
Literature reference: [39]
https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/051-001.html
Details see chapter 5.4
6.3 Recommendation (modified 2022)
In the case of substance abuse/harmful use, espe-
especially of tobacco, cannabis or alcohol, a short
a brief intervention and, if necessary, cessation treatment should be offered.
treatment should be offered.
Recommend-
degree of recommendation
A
Level of
evidence
Ia
Result
Consensus procedure
12 Yes
0 no
1 abstentions
Strong consensus
Reference: [40-43]
https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/038-025.html
https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/076-001.html
https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/076-006.html
Details see chapter 6.3

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de70

6.4 Recommendation (modified 2022)
The treatment of potentially causative diseases should be optimized.
diseases should be optimized.
Recommend-
degree of recommendation
A
Level of
evidence
Ia
Result
Consensus procedure
12 Yes
0 no
0 abstentions
Strong consensus
Literature reference: [33,44,45]
https://www.leitlinien.de/themen/copd
https://www.leitlinien.de/themen/herzinsuffizienz
https://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/leitlinien/supportive-therapie/
Details see chapter 6.4
6.5 Recommendation
A. (modified 2022) In the case of a large number of underlying
underlying disorders or diseases
behavioral therapy and/or symptom
ptom-oriented activating measures improve fatigue and
fatigue and general well-being and should be offered in these cases.
be offered in these cases.
* This does not apply to ME/CFS including ver-
diagnosis.
Recommend-
degree of recommendation
A
Level of
evidence
Ia-IV
Result
Consensus procedure
14 Yes
0 no
2 abstentions
Strong consensus
Reference: [20,46-48] https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng206
For details, see sections 6.1, 6.3, 6.4. and 5.7.
B. (new 2022) In the case of unexplained fatigue.
behavioral therapy and/or symptom-oriented activating
Activating measures can be offered.
This does not apply to ME/CFS including
diagnosis.* In this case, the individual reaction to the
individual response to these and, if necessary, the
measures are to be adjusted or terminated.
* This does not apply to ME/CFS, including the diagnosis of
diagnosis
C. (New 2022) In ME/CFS, no physical
activations based on the deconditioning
concept should be offered. Attention should be paid to the
Exercise intolerance with varying latency.
Behavioral therapy may be offered,
especially for the therapy of accompanying sympto-
*See Special Opinion Chapter 5.7.5 and Repli-
in the guideline report chapter 4.3.
0
A
IIa-IV

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de71

Literature reference: [20,39], https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/051-001.html
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng206
For details see chapter 5.4, 5.7 and 6.1, 6.3.
Preliminary note
The overall view of the studies (see 4.2) shows that a clearly determinable and directly
treatable cause, especially of a somatic nature, is rare in cases of primary unexplained fatigue.
Rather, in addition to addressing the family and broader social context, symptom-oriented
symptom-oriented treatment is often indicated. This should depend on the type and extent of the symptoms,
the functional impairment, the associated feelings and perceptions.
To facilitate a conversation about this, a symptom diary can be helpful. To
guideline, counseling aids/patient information have been developed that support three
counseling issues: activating measures, overuse complaints/de-
tension procedures, and counseling about sleep hygiene.

6.2 Drug therapy
The internationally published evidence on different forms of therapy for fatigue irrespective of an underlying somatic or
of fatigue independent of an underlying somatic or mental illness relates predominantly to
to ME/CFS or CFS without PEM as a mandatory criterion. As these are small and hetero-
and heterogeneous groups of patients, some with extreme symptom severity, these results are
results can only be applied with great caution to other patients.
The antidepressant fluoxetine [461] did not have a positive effect on ME/CFS, only a possible depressive comorbidity was found.
depressive comorbidity seems to be positively influenced [453].
[453].
There are several other studies on drug therapy in ME/CFS. None of them has
convincing evidence of efficacy. Euromene [21] lists such therapy trials.
For fatigue in general - i.e., not limited to ME/CFS - drug inter-
ventions have predominantly disappointed, with substantial placebo effects observed
[462-464], or are methodologically inadequate/inconsistent [465]. Thus, a tes-
tosterone administration did not improve vitality at slightly lower levels [381], and melatonin also
melatonin did not cause a relevant change in daytime sleepiness [466], but may be effective in the case of
However, it may be helpful in cases of insomnia that are not sufficiently alleviated by behavioral measures [21].
The psychostimulants methylphenidate and modafinil are recommended in guidelines for the following disorders.
as a justifiable therapeutic attempt for fatigue that cannot be influenced in any other way.
listed: Parkinson's disease [467] https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/030-010.html,
multiple sclerosis [468] https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/030-050LG.html and tu-
morassociated fatigue [45] https://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/leitlinien/sup-
portive-therapy/. To date, there is no robust evidence-based basis for this; moreover, the use of these
the use of these substances for the three indications represents an off-label use with all the legal
legal consequences, which is why the guideline group does not support the use of these substances for the therapy of fatigue.
for the treatment of fatigue is critical. Pitolisant improves daytime sleepiness in OSA patients.
in OSA patients. This is countered by considerable side effects and unclear cardiovascular si-
safety, and the substance is currently not approved for this indication in Germany [469].
approved in Germany [469].

In a small short-term study, a phytopreparation (valerian, hops, jujube) improved pri-
mary insomnia improved sleep quality and daytime sleepiness [470]. Withdrawal of sleeping pills (benzodi-
azepines or Z-substances) improves daytime sleepiness- even in those who have not com- pletely discontinued
pletely discontinued, although tending to a lesser extent [471]. Avoidance of
alcohol and sedatives before bed improves symptoms of obstructive sleep apnea [19].
Sleep Apnea [19] https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/063-001.html.
There is evidence of improvement in quality of life, as well as fatigue and generalized
performance with i.v. iron supplementation in patients with heart failure and proven iron deficiency.
proven iron deficiency, even with normal Hb levels [472,473]. Oral iron substituti
iron deficiency without anemia in endurance athletes and menstruating women with fatigue.
menstruating women with fatigue [474-478]. In some cases
in some cases the blinding was insufficient [132,134,479]. From these studies it can be concluded that
in mild iron deficiency without anemia (ferritin < 50 μg/l), the substitution effects are probably
Placebo effects. However, when ferritin levels were below 15 μg/l or transferrin saturation < 20%
however, tired women of childbearing age (and thus regular mens-
trual blood loss) benefited from substitution in terms of fatigue and general performance.
ability.
It is unlikely that iron supplementation in otherwise healthy individuals and
without severe iron deficiency or anemia, because this is usually much more influenced by other factors.
influenced much more significantly by other factors. The benefit of a treatment
with a largely harmless oral therapy, which is not covered by the GKV if the patient is 12 years or older
years of age, the risk of fixation on an inadequate approach to the solution is
inadequate approach.
In pregnant women, the US Preventive Task Force does not recommend iron supplementation in the absence of anemia.
deficiency without anemia because the data only showed clear improvements in blood parameters.
improvements in blood parameters but no consistent positive effects on maternal or fetal health [480].
maternal or child health [480]. Iron overload, on the other hand, is potentially harmful
[481,482].
In cases of proven iron deficiency, substitution can be achieved with dietary changes
[595], iron-fortified foods [483], or oral substitution, especially
if the cause of the deficiency cannot be corrected in the long term. Regarding the form of iron substitution
in premenstrual women, there is a Cochrane review [484], according to which continuous
administration is somewhat more effective than intermittent oral supplementation. In the global recommendations
on iron supplementation in women of reproductive age should also include social aspects
[485].
Increasingly, parenteral substitution is being advocated, especially since a number of studies have exclusively used this form of therapy.
exclusively this form of therapy. Due to the approval status of these preparations and the
guidelines on drug therapy, the following restrictions apply, for example, to the prescription of
iron carboxymaltose (adapted from Ferinject):

Aids to Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de75

n The laboratory-chemical blood test must prove an iron deficiency
n From the physician's point of view, oral iron preparations are unsuitable or ineffective for those affected.
Reasons for this may include poor tolerance of a previous oral iron therapy, difficulty in swallowing
therapy, swallowing difficulties or diseases that preclude adequate iron absorption (e.g., inflammatory
absorption (e.g. underlying inflammatory diseases, absorption disorders). A therapy
with an oral iron preparation does not necessarily have to precede the prescription of i.v. iron carboxymaltose.
i.v. does not necessarily have to precede the prescription. If the physician is considering oral therapy and concludes that
and comes to the conclusion that oral iron is ineffective or not applicable for other
reasons, iron carboxymaltose can also be used as initial therapy.
therapy.
n If the physician decides against oral iron therapy, he or she must be able to justify this medically.
medical justification - it is advisable to document the justification.
worthwhile. In this case, the prescription in drop form should also be considered,
because in the case of intolerance to tablets, the use of appropriate drops is often successful.
drops is often successful.
Because of the rare but potentially serious side effects of parenteral iron therapy, careful patient education is essential.
careful patient education and adherence to appropriate safety standards are particularly important.
and adherence to appropriate safety standards are particularly important.
 
Well, seems good and the right people are pissed.
Interesting for them to lean on the Flottorp piece in that way when there are so many problems with it.

What was that website that was meant to be good for translating more technical documents?
It's actually very telling that they are relying on an opinion piece with many factual errors, rather than actual evidence. Of which they have none, as they are showing clearly by emphasizing fake controversies and doing a classic DARVO.

No honorable person uses DARVO. No self-respecting professional uses DARVO in their work. These people are dishonorable.
 
Physicians first rule out physical causes and only then work on the psychosocial area.
the psychosocial area.
Clear somatic causes are only found in a small proportion of patients or those with primary unexplained causes.
patients with primary unexplained fatigue. An organic clarification process that lasts for weeks
process of organic clarification can, until its conclusion, fixate the conviction in the patient that the
that there is a hidden physical illness as the cause [436].
[436]. This view is very difficult to correct later. Consequence: a psychosocial
psychosocial understanding with the patient at the time of the initial contact; this will be
even in the rare case of a purely somatic explanation of fatigue.
of the doctor-patient relationship, because somatic diseases also have their psychological and social components.
and social components. Patients with excessive daytime sleepiness and proven sleep apnea syndrome
sleep apnea syndrome often also have symptoms of depression [437].
In the case of known chronic diseases, fatigue is hastily related to the disease process itself.
to the disease process itself.
In fact, depression or exhausted mental compensations are,
disturbed sleep, pain, consequences of physical inactivity (deconditioning), thera-
side effects of therapy and interactions between all these factors are at least as important.
These general factors require specific treatment and rehabilitation measures.
bilitation measures. Consequence: apply this guideline consistently to patients with known chronic
known chronic diseases.
Their utter certainty is terrifying.
 
I've just edited the 'special comment' translation to hopefully make it easier to read, though it would be worth checking any key phrasing with a German speaker.

My thoughts:

"The historically less distinctively originated designation "ME" can be misleadingly understood [McEvedy and Beard 1970, Shorter 1993]"

Interesting references to support that point.

A lot of their concerns seem to be about managing patients' beliefs, and concern that phrasing that they consider to be negative or fear inducing could be harmful to us. I find this attitude towards us interesting.

"Negative expectations with corresponding effects on their symptoms, their quality of life and their way of life. In the opinion of the undersigned societies, the term "ME" should not be used/should therefore not be passed on uncritically."

They express quite a bit of concern about PEM, but it's not entirely clear exactly why this is. They say it is not sufficiently specific to ME/CFS:

"It is indisputable that PEM can occur after previous exertion, however, this, as well as non-restorative sleep, is insufficiently specific, and is also found, for example, in patients with fibromyalgia, cancer-associated fatigue and other fatigue syndromes. [Nijs et al. 2013, Barhorst et al. 2022, Twomey et al. 2020].

The emphasis on PEM as a specific characteristic of or warning sign for CFS is, according to the assessment of the undersigned professional societies misleading."


But re subjective fatigue they say (citing Flottorp whose Lancet commentary on NICE is seen as important): "the importance of subjectively emp- fatigue was invalidated, although it is the main symptom of the syndrome;". Why is subjective fatigue the 'main symptom' rather than PEM? Who should decide what the 'main symptom' is? After complaining about PEM being insufficiently specific it seems odd for them to assert subjective fatigue is the main symptom.

They also say re PEM:

"Since, in the view of the undersigned professional societies, PEM is not very specific, this recommendation may also have a negative impact on behavior.

Recommendation may also have a negative impact on the behavior, quality of life, health and thus the prognosis of other patients with fatigue, who may fear that they too also suffer from ME/CFS."


Do things like that first sentence indicate a concern that the concept of PEM could fear inducing for patients? I wasn't clear on how the language should be interpreted tbh.

re GET, they say:

"In the case of "ME/CFS", according to recommendation 6.5 C, no physical activities should be offered on the basis of the deconditioning concept.

A rigid training plan is certainly hardly purposeful. However, according to the assessment of the undersigned professional societies patients with CFS should be offered staged activation and suitable exercise after careful examination and
and indication. "


I'm not sure if they think that GET of the basis on the deconditioning model of ME/CFS should be provided?

They say "Interventions should not be withheld from those affected or presented in a fearful manner."

When we don't have a good understanding of the cause of someone's health problems, and the evidence of the effect of treatments is not very good, providing warnings of possible problems seems a fair thing to do to me.


5.7.5 - the 'special' comment.

Apparently this is what the acronyms are for:
  • German College for Psychosomatic Medicine (DKPM)
  • German Society for Psychosomatic Medicine and Medical Psychotherapy (DGPM)
  • German society for Internal Medicine (DGIM)
  • German Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Neurology (DGPPN)
5.7.5 Special vote DKPM, DGPM, DGIM, DGPPN on ME/CFS
The neutral term "Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS)" used in the previous version of the guideline for patients with pronounced and chronic fatigue is undisputed. The designation "ME/CFS" ("ME" for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis or Myalgic Encephal-lomyelopathy), on the other hand, implies an organic disease, namely an inflammation or disease of the brain and spinal cord. This can initially provide understandable relief for those affected, especially if they have previously experienced medical disinterest, misjudgement or even stigmatization as "patients", or even stigmatization as "mentally ill".

The historically less distinctively originated designation "ME" can be misleadingly understood [McEvedy and Beard 1970, Shorter 1993]. Given multiple findings on the "nocebo" effect [Colloca and Barsky 2020], there is a likelihood that the diagnostic label of a possibly irreversible or progressive CNS disease, which may have been triggered by a previous viral disease, is likely to be prognostically unfavorable.

Negative expectations with corresponding effects on their symptoms, their quality of life and their way of life. In the opinion of the undersigned societies, the term "ME" should not be used/should therefore not be passed on uncritically.

Modern neuropsychobehavioral models of the development of distressing physical complaints and fatigue are not sufficiently addressed in relation to CFS [Hennings-en et al. 2018, Greenhouse-Tucknott et al. 2022]. Thus, from the point of view of the un-signatory professional societies, the guideline does not do justice to the claim of a biopsychosocial medicine. This does not only understand illnesses as biomechanical disorders, but also takes into account individual experiences, life circumstances and behavior patterns. As an example, lifestyle factors in cardiovascular diseases are mentioned, which have both a causal and a
play both a causative and a perpetuating role [Patnode et al. 2022].

The description of CFS as a supposedly broadly recognized "multisystemic disease" is misleading.

We believe, in accordance with guideline recommendation 6.1. ("It should be noted that often several causal health problems have to be assumed and treated.), that the etiology of CFS is multifactorial in the biopsychosocial sense.

The current guideline version conveys the view that CFS is

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de64

a condition distinct from other conditions of increased fatigue (e.g., in the context of organic diseases such as cancer or multiple sclerosis, or also in the context of psychological depressive disorders), which can be distinguished above all by a specific, so-called post exertional malaise (PEM), i.e. a subjectively experienced, more than 24 hours lasting deterioration of the condition after previous
exertion. It is indisputable that PEM can occur after previous exertion, however, this, as well as non-restorative sleep, is insufficiently specific, and is also found, for example, in patients with fibromyalgia, cancer-associated fatigue and other fatigue syndromes. [Nijs et al. 2013, Barhorst et al. 2022, Twomey et al. 2020].

The emphasis on PEM as a specific characteristic of or warning sign for CFS is, according to the assessment of the undersigned professional societies misleading. In the view of the undersigned professional societies, the following are clinically particularly problematic recommendations for therapy or even warnings of worsening:

In the case of "ME/CFS", according to recommendation 6.5 C, no physical activities should be offered on the basis of the deconditioning concept.

A rigid training plan is certainly hardly purposeful. However, according to the assessment of the undersigned professional societies patients with CFS should be offered staged activation and suitable exercise after careful examination and
and indication.

Patients with CFS should be offered staged activation and suitable psychotherapeutic intervention.

Iatrogenic passivation and chronification should be avoided.

That patients with CFS who participated in randomized studies of cognitive behavioral therapy or graded activation therapy rated themselves
improved (44% and 43%) and only a small proportion rated themselves as having worsened (11% and 14%).
[Ingman et al. 2022, White et al. 2021 and S3 guideline "Functional Bodily
per Complaints"].

Strict avoidance of activities can counterproductively lead to loneliness, deconditioning and withdrawal, which can fix and maintain the symptomatology.

Since, in the view of the undersigned professional societies, PEM is not very specific, this recommendation may also have a negative impact on behavior.

Recommendation may also have a negative impact on the behavior, quality of life, health and thus the prognosis of other patients with fatigue, who may fear that they too who may fear that they also suffer from ME/CFS.

Because it is based on "models of a "wrong disease conviction," behavioral therapy should not be used for "ME/CFS," according to the guideline, or only for the treatment of concomitant symptoms. The good evidence for a limited, but clear efficacy of staged activation therapy and cognitive cognitive behavioral therapy in patients with severe CFS, including PEM, is ignored. These and possibly other evidence-based therapies, e.g. MBSR or ACT, should not be ignored.

Interventions should not be withheld from those affected or presented in a fearful manner.

It should be formally pointed out that the repeated and without own evaluation NICE guideline on ME/CFS, which is used to justify various statements in this guideline are justified, is highly problematic from the point of view of the signatory professionals as there are indications that the evidence in this guideline has been incorrectly evaluated and one-sidedly assessed in this guideline. The main points of criticism are as follows [Flottorp

Aids for Good Medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de65

et al. 2022]:

The creation of a new definition of ME/CFS led to the downgrading of the
most of the available evidence;

trial outcomes were not included at all available time points;

the definition of adverse events/harm ignored data from RCTs and was based
and was based predominantly on low-quality studies;

the importance of subjectively emp- fatigue was invalidated, although it is the main symptom of the syndrome;

Faulty characterization of Graded Exercise Therapy (GET) as a fixed treatment, not adapted to the situation of the affected person, with anecdotal evidence.

In addition, Flottorp et al. describe (post-consensus) : "that polemical interactions have became a battle within the guideline committee, that three members withdrew from guideline guideline development, and the remaining members did not accept the concerns of leading medical societies were not accepted."


Barhorst EE, Boruch AE, Cook DB, Lindheimer JB. Pain-Related Post-Exertional Malaise in Myal-
gic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) and fibromyalgia: A Systematic.
Review and Three-Level Meta-Analysis. Pain Med. 2022; 23(6):1144-1157.
Colloca L, Barsky AJ. Placebo and nocebo effects. N Engl J Med. 2020; 382: 554-561.
Flottorp SA, Brurberg KG, Fink P, Knoop H, Wyller VBB. New NICE guideline on chronic fatigue
syndrome: more ideology than science? Lancet. 2022; 399: 611-613.
Greenhouse-Tucknott A, Butterworth JB, Wrightson JG, Smeeton NJ, Critchley HD, Dekerle J,
Harrison NA. Toward the unity of pathological and exertional fatigue: A predictive processing.
model. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2022; 22: 215-228.
Henningsen P, Gündel H, Kop WJ, Löwe B, Martin A, Rief W, Rosmalen JGM, Schröder A, van
der Feltz-Cornelis C, Van den Bergh O; EURONET-SOMA Group. Persistent Physical Symptoms
as Perceptual Dysregulation: A Neuropsychobehavioral Model and Its Clinical Implications.
Psychosom Med. 2018; 80:422-431.
Ingman T, Smakowski A, Goldsmith K, Chalder T. A systematic literature review of randomized.
controlled trials evaluating prognosis following treatment for adults with chronic fatigue syn-
drome. Psychol Med. 2022 Sep 5:1-13.
Larun L, Brurberg KG, Odgaard-Jensen J, Price JR. Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syn-
drome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 2;10(10):CD003200. doi: 10.1002/14651858.
CD003200.pub8. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 31577366; PMCID: PMC6953363.
McEvedy CP, Beard AW. Concept of benign myalgic encephalomyelitis. Br Med J.
1970;1(5687):11-5.
Nijs J, Roussel N, Van Oosterwijck J, De Kooning M, Ickmans K, Struyf F, Meeus M, Lundberg M. Fear.
of movement and avoidance behavior toward physical activity in chronic-fatigue syndrome and
fibromyalgia: state of the art and implications for clinical practice. Clin Rheumatol. 2013; 32: 1121-9.

Aids for good medicine www.degam-leitlinien.de66

Patnode CD, Redmond N, Iacocca MO, Henninger M. Behavioral Counseling Interventions to.
Promote a Healthy Diet and Physical Activity for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Adults
Without Known Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic
Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. 2022 Jul 26;328(4):375-388.
S3 guideline, "Functional Body Complaints.
https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/051-001.html
Sharpe M, Chalder T, White PD. Evidence-Based Care for People with Chronic Fatigue Syndro-.
me and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis. J Gen Intern Med. 2022 ; 37:449-452.
Shorter E. Chronic fatigue in historical perspective. Ciba Found Symp. 1993;173:6-16; dis-.
cussion 16-22. Twomey R, Yeung ST, Wrightson JG, Millet GY, Culos-Reed SN. Post-exertio-
nal Malaise in People With Chronic Cancer-Related Fatigue. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020;
60:407-416.
White PD, Etherington J. Adverse outcomes in trials of graded exercise therapy for adult pati-
ents with chronic fatigue syndrome. J Psychosom Res. 2021 Aug;147:110533. doi: 10.1016/j.
jpsychores.2021.110533. epub 2021 May 28. PMID: 34091377.


Note: Patient advocacy groups (on ME/CFS) and representatives of EUROMENE
are scientifically critical of this special vote and fear harm to
affected persons. For more details on the special vote and the scientifically based
replications see guideline report chapter 4.3.
 
Last edited:
Fatigue - S3 guideline update, 2023, Kornder et al

Summary
background
Fatigue is a common symptom in the family doctor's office, where there is often diagnostic uncertainty. Sufferers use descriptions that include emotional, cognitive, physical, or behavioral aspects. A variety of biological, mental and social causes are conceivable, often in combination. The guideline refers to the procedure in the case of primarily unexplained symptoms.

search methods
The experts involved carried out a systematic search using the terms for fatigue in the context of primary care in PubMed, the Cochrane Library and by hand search. With regard to related guidelines, the guidelines of the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) could be used for myalgic encephalitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). In a structured consensus process, broad agreement was reached on the core recommendations/background text of the revised guideline.

Main messages
1) In addition to the characteristics of the symptom, i.a. Pre-existing conditions, sleep behavior, intake of psychotropic substances, psychosocial and environmental factors are asked. 2) Depression and anxiety should be recorded as common causes using screening questions, and the occurrence of post-exertion malaise (PEM) should also be asked. 3) The following basic diagnostics are recommended: physical examination, laboratory tests (blood glucose, full blood count, ESR/CRP, transaminases/γ-GT, TSH). 4) Further investigations are only indicated if there are specific indications. 5) A biopsychosocial approach should be sought. 6) Behavioral therapy and symptom-oriented activating measures can improve fatigue in the case of an underlying disease or when the cause is unknown. 7) In the case of PEM, further ME/CFS criteria are recorded and those affected are cared for accordingly.

Open access, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44266-023-00045-z
 
Depression and anxiety should be recorded as common causes
It's seriously maddening that they make it impossible to work with the consequences of chronic illness because they keep deciding they want them to be causes. Absurd. It's all correlational, and they have no issue deciding on a preferred causation.
A biopsychosocial approach should be sought
Literally, just because:
There is often a combination of different influencing factors, so that a biopsychosocial approach is adequate.
When your homework is literally worse than what ChatGPT would come up with. This is completely unserious work. Yet again.
 
Back
Top Bottom