TY - JOUR
T1 - Exploring strategies used following a group-based fatigue management programme for people with multiple sclerosis (FACETS) via the Fatigue Management Strategies Questionnaire (FMSQ)
AU - Thomas, Sarah
AU - Kersten, Paula
AU - Thomas, Peter W.
AU - Slingsby, V.
AU - Nock, A.
AU - Jones, R.
AU - Smith, A. Davies
AU - Galvin, K.T.
AU - Baker, R.
AU - Hillier, C.
N1 - This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work noncommercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
PY - 2015/10/20
Y1 - 2015/10/20
N2 - OBJECTIVES:To explore cross-sectional patterns of use of fatigue management strategies in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) who had attended a group-based fatigue management programme, Fatigue: Applying Cognitive behavioural and Energy effectiveness Techniques to lifeStyle ('FACETS'). In a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) the FACETS programme was shown to reduce fatigue severity and improve self-efficacy and quality of life.
DESIGN:A questionnaire substudy within a RCT involving the self-completed Fatigue Management Strategies Questionnaire (FMSQ). The FMSQ includes: (1) closed questions about the use and helpfulness of fatigue management strategies taught in FACETS and (2) open items about changes to lifestyle, attitudes or expectations, barriers or difficulties encountered and helpful strategies not covered in FACETS.
PARTICIPANTS:All had a clinical diagnosis of MS, significant fatigue, were ambulatory and had attended at least 4 of 6 scheduled FACETS sessions. METHODS:Participants (n=72) were posted the FMSQ with a prepaid return envelope 4 months after the end of the FACETS programme.
RESULTS:82% (59/72) of participants returned the FMSQ. The fatigue management strategies most frequently used since attending FACETS were prioritisation (80%), pacing (78%), saying no to others (78%), grading tasks (75%) and challenging unhelpful thoughts (71%). Adding in those participants who were already using the respective strategies prior to FACETS, the three most used strategies at 4 months were prioritisation (55/59), grading (54/59) and pacing (53/58). Free-text comments illustrated the complex interplay between attitudes/expectations, behaviours, emotions and the environment. Issues related to expectations featured strongly in participants' comments. Expectations (from self and others) were both facilitators and barriers to effective fatigue management.
CONCLUSIONS:Individuals' comments highlighted the complex, multifaceted nature of fatigue management. Revising expectations and a greater acceptance of fatigue were important shifts following the programme. Findings support the relevance of a cognitive behavioural approach for fatigue management. Booster sessions might be a useful addition to the FACETS programme.
AB - OBJECTIVES:To explore cross-sectional patterns of use of fatigue management strategies in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) who had attended a group-based fatigue management programme, Fatigue: Applying Cognitive behavioural and Energy effectiveness Techniques to lifeStyle ('FACETS'). In a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) the FACETS programme was shown to reduce fatigue severity and improve self-efficacy and quality of life.
DESIGN:A questionnaire substudy within a RCT involving the self-completed Fatigue Management Strategies Questionnaire (FMSQ). The FMSQ includes: (1) closed questions about the use and helpfulness of fatigue management strategies taught in FACETS and (2) open items about changes to lifestyle, attitudes or expectations, barriers or difficulties encountered and helpful strategies not covered in FACETS.
PARTICIPANTS:All had a clinical diagnosis of MS, significant fatigue, were ambulatory and had attended at least 4 of 6 scheduled FACETS sessions. METHODS:Participants (n=72) were posted the FMSQ with a prepaid return envelope 4 months after the end of the FACETS programme.
RESULTS:82% (59/72) of participants returned the FMSQ. The fatigue management strategies most frequently used since attending FACETS were prioritisation (80%), pacing (78%), saying no to others (78%), grading tasks (75%) and challenging unhelpful thoughts (71%). Adding in those participants who were already using the respective strategies prior to FACETS, the three most used strategies at 4 months were prioritisation (55/59), grading (54/59) and pacing (53/58). Free-text comments illustrated the complex interplay between attitudes/expectations, behaviours, emotions and the environment. Issues related to expectations featured strongly in participants' comments. Expectations (from self and others) were both facilitators and barriers to effective fatigue management.
CONCLUSIONS:Individuals' comments highlighted the complex, multifaceted nature of fatigue management. Revising expectations and a greater acceptance of fatigue were important shifts following the programme. Findings support the relevance of a cognitive behavioural approach for fatigue management. Booster sessions might be a useful addition to the FACETS programme.
U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008274
DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008274
M3 - Article
SN - 2044-6055
VL - 5
SP - 1
EP - 10
JO - BMJ Open
JF - BMJ Open
IS - 10
ER -