Table 3.
Fatigue dimension scores in depressed patients with somatic symptoms, grouped as with or without inflammation based on CRP.
|
MFI Fatigue Dimensions |
Evidence of inflammation |
Mean Difference (95% CI)a |
Test Statisticb (P-value) for final model | CorrectedcP-value for final model | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes (n = 40; Mean (SD) |
No (n = 44; Mean (SD) |
Unadjusted | Adjusted for age, sex, BMI | Additional adjustment for antidepressant type | |||
| General fatigue | 18.40 (1.43) | 16.55 (2.94) | 1.86 (0.84, 2.87) | 1.88 (0.57, 3.19) | 1.82 (0.51, 3.13) | 2.85 (<0.01)d | 0.03 |
| Physical fatigue | 16.80 (2.78) | 12.45 (4.20) | 4.35 (2.78, 5.91) | 4.12 (2.10, 6.13) | 3.99 (1.99, 5.98) | 3.98 (<0.01) | 0.03 |
| Mental fatigue | 15.60 (2.54) | 13.84 (3.16) | 1.73 (0.32, 3.13) | 1.44 (−0.34, 3.23) | 1.35 (−0.43, 3.13) | 1.51 (0.14) | 0.20 |
| Reduced motivation | 15.23 (3.54) | 12.61 (4.59) | 1.76 (0.51, 3.01) | 1.00 (−0.60, 2.59) | 0.90 (−0.68, 2.49) | 1.14 (0.26) | 0.26 |
| Reduced activity | 16.73 (2.78) | 15.00 (3.58) | 2.61 (0.82, 4.40) | 1.73 (−0.56, 4.02) | 1.65 (−0.64, 3.95) | 1.43 (0.16) | 0.20 |
MFI, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory; hs-CRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; SD, standard deviation; BMI, body mass index.
a
Total sample for adjusted models was N = 83.
b
Mean values for continuous variables were compared using independent samples t-test and ANCOVA.
c
P-values corrected for multiple testing using Benjamini & Hochberg’s False Discovery Rate method.
d
Variables that violated the assumption of normality (i.e., MFI general fatigue) were square-transformed before testing significance due to left skew.