A Brief Questionnaire to Assess Post-Exertional Malaise

Post-exertional malaise (PEM) is a key symptom of myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Currently, five PEM-items from the DePaul Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) were recommended as a first step in measuring this symptom for patients with ME and CFS by the National Institute...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inDiagnostics (Basel) Vol. 8; no. 3; p. 66
Main Authors Cotler, Joseph, Holtzman, Carly, Dudun, Catherine, Jason, Leonard A
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Switzerland MDPI AG 11.09.2018
MDPI
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Post-exertional malaise (PEM) is a key symptom of myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Currently, five PEM-items from the DePaul Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) were recommended as a first step in measuring this symptom for patients with ME and CFS by the National Institutes of Health/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (NIH/CDC) Common Data Elements' (CDE) working group. The second step in this process, as recommended by the NIH/CDC CDE working group, involves assembling information from various sources to confirm the presence of PEM. There have not been any efforts, to date, to standardize this second-step process in the assessment of PEM. The current study examined whether five supplementary items on the DSQ could be used to operationalize the second step of the recommendations made by the NIH/CDC CDE working group. The five supplementary DSQ PEM duration items correctly categorized patients with ME or CFS 81.7% of the time, while incorrectly categorizing multiple sclerosis (MS) and post-polio syndrome (PPS) as ME or CFS only 16.6% of the time. The findings suggested that a PEM second-step process could be operationalized using supplementary DSQ items.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:2075-4418
2075-4418
DOI:10.3390/diagnostics8030066