The Relationship Between Childhood Trauma and the Response to Group CBT for CFS, 2020, De Venter et al

Dolphin

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Free full text:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00536/full

ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE
Front. Psychiatry, 12 June 2020 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00536
The Relationship Between Childhood Trauma and the Response to Group Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Jela Illegems3,4,
newprofile_default_profileimage_new.jpg
Rita Van Royen3,4,
newprofile_default_profileimage_new.jpg
Bernard G. C. Sabbe2, Greta Moorkens3,4 and Filip Van Den Eede1,2,3*
  • 1University Psychiatric Department, Campus Antwerp University Hospital (UZA), Edegem, Belgium
  • 2Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Collaborative Antwerp Psychiatric Research Institute (CAPRI), University of Antwerp (UA), Antwerp, Belgium
  • 3Behaviour Therapy Division for Fatigue and Functional Symptoms, Antwerp University Hospital (UZA), Edegem, Belgium
  • 4Department of Internal Medicine, Antwerp University Hospital (UZA), Edegem, Belgium
Objective: To examine the relationship between childhood trauma and the response to group cognitive-behavioural therapy (GCBT) for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS).

Methods: A single cohort study conducted in an outpatient university referral center for CFS including a well-documented sample of adult patients meeting the CDC criteria for CFS and having received 9 to 12 months of GCBT. A mixed effect model was adopted to examine the impact of childhood trauma on the treatment response in general and over time. The main outcome measures were changes in fatigue, as assessed with the Checklist Individual Strength (total score), and physical functioning, as gauged with the Short Form 36 Health Survey subscale, with the scales being completed at baseline, immediately after treatment completion and after 1 year.

Results: We included 105 patients with CFS. Childhood trauma was not significantly associated with the response to GCBT over time on level of fatigue or physical functioning.

Conclusion: Childhood trauma does not seem to have an effect on the treatment response to dedicated GCBT for CFS sufferers over time. Therefore, in the allocation of patients to this kind of treatment, a history of childhood trauma should not be seen as prohibitive.
 
I have always thought that group therapy of any kind would be so incredibly intrusive, embarrassing and humiliating that I could never go through with it. The idea that I might spill personal information I don't want to be made public would prevent me from saying anything.

Does anyone actually ever get any benefit from this kind of group therapy? And what kind of problems do they have?

I just can't get my head round the idea that it does nothing other than tick a few boxes for the Powers-That-Be (PTB), and allows the PTB to pretend they are actually doing something useful, while spending the absolute minimum amount of money possible. After that's happened they push the people taking part out into the world telling them that are healed, so now they should stop bothering everyone, particularly the medical profession and the DWP.

I have to admit just writing this and thinking of going through therapy in a group made me excruciatingly embarrassed just imagining it. I'm sure my face has gone absolutely bright red.
 
Childhood trauma does not seem to have an effect on the treatment response to dedicated GCBT for CFS sufferers over time. Therefore, in the allocation of patients to this kind of treatment, a history of childhood trauma should not be seen as prohibitive.
How does BPS research somehow always manage to conclude exactly the worst possible thing at every turn? Nobody ever suggested it could be prohibitive, it's only ever been weirdos like Crawley pushing the assumption that it must play a huge role as a causative factor. An assumption that is widely believed despite there being no evidence of any kind.

It's seriously a special talent to actually manage to get it wrong so systematically.
 
Couldn't you also say that if childhood abuse is not relevant, why dredge it up in the first place?

I'm sure lots of people have experienced negative situations either as kids or adults. I'm not convinced that it's always the best idea to bring it back up for an unrelated issue.
 
Couldn't you also say that if childhood abuse is not relevant, why dredge it up in the first place?

I'm sure lots of people have experienced negative situations either as kids or adults. I'm not convinced that it's always the best idea to bring it back up for an unrelated issue.
with the current focus on ACEs ( Adverse childhood events) and these being pulled into every sphere of life childhood trauma is both big business and an Elastoplast for all life's ills.
It's a distraction - there is no question that some children experience trauma that deeply affects them, however little seems to be focused on addressing the underlying causes of trauma, just fishing for labels.
 
There was no significant correlation found between childhood trauma on the one hand and baseline fatigue (CIS), baseline physical functioning (SF-36), age, sex, and psychiatric status on the other. The baseline outcome measures were also not correlated with age, sex and psychiatric status. We therefore decided not to include any of these variables in the linear mixed model that will be described in the following section.

Mhmm.
 
There was no significant correlation found between childhood trauma on the one hand and baseline fatigue (CIS), baseline physical functioning (SF-36), age, sex, and psychiatric status on the other. The baseline outcome measures were also not correlated with age, sex and psychiatric status. We therefore decided not to include any of these variables in the linear mixed model that will be described in the following section
Mhmm.
Well there's a result they don't want to advertise
 
Back
Top Bottom