Table 4.
Summary of outcomes for depressive symptoms and other relevant findings for included studies
| Authors (year) | Measure of depression | Pretreatment | Post-treatment (unless otherwise stated) | Statistical analysis of change in depressive symptomatology | Summary of other relevant findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chalder et al (2002) | HADS | Mean 8.4 (IQR 5.7–11) | 6-month follow-up Mean 3 (IQR 3–5) |
Wilcoxon signed-ranks test −3.33 (two-tailed significance 0.00) | All 20 treatment completers returned to school at 6 months follow-up, with 95% attending full time. Depression significantly improved, as did social adjustment |
| Denborough et al (2003) | BDI | Mean score 21 | Mean score 15 | Improvement p<0.001 Maintained at 6-month follow-up (p<0.038) |
On discharge, the mean depression score significantly better than on admission. Also significant improvement in Chronic Fatigue Illness Disability score and significant decrease in FSS score (maintained at 6-month follow-up). Achenbach/Youth Self-Report scores improved significantly by discharge, but returned to above admission levels at 6 months |
| Gordon and Lubitz (2009) | BDI | Mean 19.88 SD 8.62 | Mean 11.44 SD 10.98 | Paired t-test p value 0.001 sig 0.008 | Significant improvement in BDI scores, Fatigue Severity scores |
| Gordon et al (2010) | BDI | Resistance Arm Pretreatment 20.9±11.3 |
Resistance arm Post-treatment 14.2±10.0 |
Resistance arm Difference −6.7±8.5 p=0.03 |
Significant improvement in BDI scores in both arms |
| Aerobic arm Pretreatment 16.4±4.3 |
Aerobic arm Post-treatment 12.2±6.7 |
Aerobic arm Difference −4.2±4.8 p=0.002 |
|||
| Henderson (2014) | CDI | Mean score 14±2.83 (4 patients with mood disorder, 16.8±1.92) (11 patients without mood disorder 12.73±2.00) | Not stated | Not reported | All patients reported at least 80% self-rated improvement. Significant reduction in FSS, MSFI (all subscales) |
| Kawatani et al (2011) | Zung self-rating depression scale | 53.3±6.7 | Not stated | Not reported | No significant change between baseline fatigue scores and fatigue scores 6 m follow-up. Significant improvement in performance status scores (self-reported impact on functioning) |
| Lloyd et al (2012) | Birleson Depression Scale | Baseline mean 13.38 (SD 4.76) Pretreatment mean 12.91 (SD 5.57) |
Post-treatment mean 10.98 (SD 5.35) 3-month follow-up mean 10.47 (SD 5.87) 6-month follow-up mean 9.22 (SD 5.36) |
Multilevel modelling and Wald tests Treatment effect estimate at 6 months −3.69 (CI −5.17 to −2.21) Significance (two-tailed) <0.001, effect size 0.78 |
Significant change in fatigue and school attendance, with improvements in depression, impairment and adjustment at 6 months |
| Rimes et al (2007) | 3 of 4 had at least 1 psychiatric diagnosis at baseline | 4 participants developed CFS/ME at follow-up (4–6 months) | Not reported | Of the 4 participants who developed CFS/ME over the follow-up period, 3 of 4 had at least 1 psychiatric diagnosis at baseline, 3 had reported being ‘much more tired and worn out than usual over the last month’ at time 1, 2 participants had frequent headaches at time 1, 1 also had sleep problems and postexertional malaise at time 1 | |
| Van de Putte et al (2007) | CDI | Mean score at baseline 11.7 SD 6.1 | Not stated | Not reported | 47% of adolescents ‘fully recovered’ (below score ie, mean plus 2 SD of subjective fatigue distribution in health adolescents). |
BDI, Beck Depression Inventory; CDI, Children's Depression Inventory; CFS, Chalder Fatigue Scale; CIS-20, Checklist of Individual Strength; FSS, Fatigue Severity Scale; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.