Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

uu.sePublications from Uppsala University
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome and the biopsychosocial model: a review of patient harm and distress in the medical encounter
Department of General Medicine and Primary Care, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0205-1165
2019 (English)In: Disability and Rehabilitation, ISSN 0963-8288, E-ISSN 1464-5165, Vol. 41, no 25, p. 3092-3102Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: Despite the growing evidence of physiological and cellular abnormalities in myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME)/chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), there has been a strong impetus to tackle the illness utilizing a biopsychosocial model. However, many sufferers of this disabling condition report distress and dissatisfaction following medical encounters. This review seeks to account for this discord.

Methods: A narrative review methodology is employed to synthesize the evidence for potential iatrogenesis.

Results: We identify seven potential modalities of iatrogenesis or harm reported by patients:

1. difficulties in reaching an acceptable diagnosis;

2. misdiagnosis, including of other medical and psychological conditions;

3. difficulties in accessing the sick role, medical care and social support;

4. high levels of patient dissatisfaction with the quality of medical care;

5. negative responses to controversial therapies (cognitive behavioral therapy and graded exercise therapy);

6. challenges to the patient narrative and experience;

7. psychological harm (individual and collective distress).

Conclusion: The biopsychosocial framework currently applied to ME/CFS is too narrow in focus and fails to adequately incorporate the patient narrative. Misdiagnosis, conflict, and harm are observable outcomes where doctors' and patients' perspectives remain incongruent. Biopsychosocial practices should be scrutinized for potential harms. Clinicians should consider adopting alternative patient-centred approaches.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis Group, 2019. Vol. 41, no 25, p. 3092-3102
National Category
Other Medical Sciences not elsewhere specified
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-488733DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2018.1481149ISI: 000618803700013PubMedID: 29929450OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-488733DiVA, id: diva2:1712610
Available from: 2022-11-22 Created: 2022-11-22 Last updated: 2023-04-28Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records

Blease, Charlotte

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Blease, Charlotte
In the same journal
Disability and Rehabilitation
Other Medical Sciences not elsewhere specified

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 15 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf