Context The optimal management of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is unclear and
comprehensive evidence-based guidelines have not been reported.
Objective To provide up-to-date evidence-based guidelines for the optimal treatment
of FMS.
Data Sources, Selection, and Extraction A search of all human trials (randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses
of randomized controlled trials) of FMS was made using Cochrane Collaboration
Reviews (1993-2004), MEDLINE (1966-2004), CINAHL (1982-2004), EMBASE (1988-2004),
PubMed (1966-2004), Healthstar (1975-2000), Current Contents (2000-2004),
Web of Science (1980-2004), PsychInfo (1887-2004), and Science Citation Indexes
(1996-2004). The literature review was performed by an interdisciplinary panel,
composed of 13 experts in various pain management disciplines, selected by
the American Pain Society (APS), and supplemented by selected literature reviews
by APS staff members and the Utah Drug Information Service. A total of 505
articles were reviewed.
Data Synthesis There are major limitations to the FMS literature, with many treatment
trials compromised by short duration and lack of masking. There are no medical
therapies that have been specifically approved by the US Food and Drug Administration
for management of FMS. Nonetheless, current evidence suggests efficacy of
low-dose tricyclic antidepressants, cardiovascular exercise, cognitive behavioral
therapy, and patient education. A number of other commonly used FMS therapies,
such as trigger point injections, have not been adequately evaluated.
Conclusions Despite the chronicity and complexity of FMS, there are pharmacological
and nonpharmacological interventions available that have clinical benefit.
Based on current evidence, a stepwise program emphasizing education, certain
medications, exercise, cognitive therapy, or all 4 should be recommended.
At any one time, 10% to 12% of the general population report chronic
generalized musculoskeletal pain that cannot be traced to a specific structural
or inflammatory cause.1 Such idiopathic widespread
pain most often will fit the classification criteria for fibromyalgia syndrome
(FMS).2
Quiz Ref IDThe diagnosis of FMS is based on a history of widespread
pain, defined as bilateral, upper and lower body, as well as spine, and the
presence of excessive tenderness on applying pressure to 11 of 18 specific
muscle-tendon sites.3 The 1990 American College
of Rheumatology classification criteria for the diagnosis of fibromyalgia
provide a sensitivity and specificity of nearly 85% in differentiating FMS
from other forms of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Surveys using
these criteria have found an FMS prevalence of 2% in the United States, including
3.4% of women and 0.5% of men.4,5 Fibromyalgia
is the second most common disorder observed by rheumatologists (after osteoarthritis),
yet rheumatologists in the United States currently provide care for less than
20% of individuals with fibromyalgia.6,7
Chronic pain syndromes, such as FMS, are defined by subjective symptoms
and lack unique pathophysiological characteristics. Questions often arise
regarding the nature and existence of illnesses like FMS. Indeed, no discrete
boundary separates syndromes such as FMS, chronic fatigue syndrome, irritable
bowel syndrome, or chronic muscular headaches.8 Furthermore,
these illnesses are each comorbid with mood disturbances.9
Defining pain syndromes like FMS, headaches, or back pain provides a
common framework to study the clinical and physiological characteristics.10 Research during the past decade has demonstrated
similar abnormal pain processing in FMS and related chronic pain syndromes.
Patients with FMS have lowered mechanical and thermal pain thresholds, high
pain ratings for noxious stimuli, and altered temporal summation of pain stimuli.10-13 Physiological
evidence of altered pain processing in FMS has been demonstrated by brain
imaging14-16 as
well as by a 3-fold higher concentration of cerebrospinal fluid substance
P compared with that in healthy controls.17
The familial coaggregation and frequent comorbidity of FMS, irritable
bowel syndrome, and chronic fatigue syndrome with mood disorders also suggests
a major role for neuroendocrine and stress-response abnormalities.9 Specific polymorphisms in the serotonin transporter
gene and the catechol-O-methyltransferase enzyme that inactivates
catecholamines have been associated with FMS.18-20 Altered
patterns of basal and stimulated activity of several neuroendocrine axes and
autonomic nervous system dysfunction have also been demonstrated.21-23 Psychosocial factors
contribute greatly to the clinical expression of FMS and related disorders.24
Despite improved recognition and understanding of FMS, treatment remains
challenging. Some believe that no effective treatment exists.25 Nevertheless,
approximately 500 peer-reviewed articles on FMS therapy have been published
during the past 25 years.26 We summarize the
findings of a report commissioned by the American Pain Society (APS) to provide
evidence-based guidelines for the optimal treatment of FMS.
Data Sources and Study Selection
Under the auspices of the APS, an interdisciplinary panel was selected,
that comprised 13 experts in various pain management disciplines. A comprehensive
literature review conducted by this panel and staff members and commissioned
by the APS, including the Utah Drug Information Service from The University
of Utah Health Sciences Drug Information Resource Center, included MEDLINE
(1966-2004), CINAHL (1982-2004), EMBASE (1988-2004), PubMed (1966-2004), Healthstar
(1975-2000), Current Contents (2000-2004), Web of Science (1980-2004), PsychInfo
(1887-2004), Science Citation Indexes (1996-2004), and Cochrane Collaboration
Reviews (1993-2004). References were consistently checked electronically for
any relevant articles. A total of 505 articles were reviewed and classified
according to their level of evidence.
Evidence for treatment efficacy was ranked as strong (positive results
from a meta-analysis or consistently positive results from more than 1 randomized
controlled trial [RCT]), moderate (positive results from 1 RCT or largely
positive results from multiple RCTs or consistently positive results from
multiple non-RCT studies), and weak (positive results from descriptive and
case studies, inconsistent results from RCTs, or both). We also discuss therapies
that are commonly used in FMS but have not been adequately evaluated.
Change in pain was the most common outcome measure and was usually evaluated
with 100-mm numerical rating scales or visual analog scales. Similar self-administered
instruments were used to evaluate fatigue, sleep, and global well-being in
most trials. A manual tender point assessment was usually performed, although
some trials also measured pain thresholds with dolorimetry. Function was generally
assessed by self-reported, validated instruments, most often the Fibromyalgia
Impact Questionnaire (FIQ).27,28 The
FIQ measures physical functioning, work status, depression, anxiety, morning
tiredness, pain, stiffness, fatigue, and well-being during the preceding week.
Psychological function was often evaluated with FIQ subscales for depression
and anxiety or validated instruments for depression (Beck Depression Inventory29 and Hamilton Rating Scale30).
Most studies that evaluated exercise training also used measures of cardiorespiratory
fitness, such as submaximal or maximal treadmill or cycle ergometer tests,
6-minute walk, and measured grip strength or hip and knee extension strength.
Although no study has formally assessed the therapeutic impact of an
FMS diagnosis, we believe that establishing the diagnosis, if integrated with
patient education, is an essential component of high-quality management. Nevertheless,
some clinicians have speculated that knowledge of the FMS diagnosis has an
adverse effect on patient outcome.25 A single
study31 designed to evaluate whether the fibromyalgia
diagnosis alters health status followed previously nonlabeled FMS (prelabeling)
patients after they were given the FMS diagnosis (postlabeling). There was
significant improvement in health satisfaction and fewer symptoms 3 years
postlabeling. No significant increase in the percentage of patients claiming
disability occurred postlabeling.
There is strong evidence that intensive patient education is an effective
treatment in FMS. Randomized controlled trials compared patient education
with wait-listed or untreated controls or with stretching and movement.32-35 Education
was usually given in a group format using lectures, written materials, group
discussions, and demonstrations. Length of the education ranged from 6 to
17 sessions. Educational groups improved on 1 or more outcomes including pain,
sleep, fatigue, self-efficacy, quality of life, and the 6-minute walk. Changes
in the treated groups were maintained for 3 to 12 months. A single multidisciplinary
education program, conducted over 11/2 days with 100 patients, demonstrated
significant improvements at 1-month posttreatment in the FIQ total score as
well as in pain severity, fatigue, morning tiredness, stiffness, anxiety,
and depression.36
Pharmacotherapy for FMS has been most successful with central nervous
system agents (Box 1).Quiz Ref IDAlthough they carry labels such as antidepressant, muscle relaxant,
or anticonvulsant, these drugs affect various neurochemicals (eg, serotonin,
norepinephrine, substance P) that have a broad range of activities in the
brain and spinal cord, including modulation of pain sensation and tolerance.
Medications
Strong Evidence for Efficacy
Amitriptyline: often helps sleep and overall well-being;
dose, 25-50 mg at bedtime.37-39,42,43
Cyclobenzaprine: similar response and adverse effects;
dose, 10-30 mg at bedtime.39-41
Modest Evidence for Efficacy
Tramadol: long-term efficacy and tolerability unknown;
administered with or without acetaminophen; dose, 200-300 mg/d.54-56
Serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs):
Fluoxetine (only one carefully evaluated at this time): dose, 20-80
mg; may be used with tricyclic given at bedtime; uncontrolled report of efficacy
using sertraline.37,45-47
Dual-reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs):
Venlafaxine: 1 RCT ineffective but 2 case reports found higher dose
effective.49-51
Milnacipran: effective in single RCT.52
Duloxetine: effective in single RCT.53
Pregabalin: second-generation anticonvulsant; effective
in single RCT.57
Weak Evidence for Efficacy
Growth hormone: modest improvement in subset of patients
with FMS with low growth hormone levels at baseline.63
5-Hydroxytryptamine (serotonin): methodological problems.59,60
Tropisetron: not commercially available.58
S-adenosyl-methionine: mixed results.61
No Evidence for Efficacy
Opioids, corticosteroids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory
drugs, benzodiazepene and nonbenzodiazepene hypnotics, melatonin, calcitonin,
thyroid hormone, guaifenesin, dehydroepiandrosterone, magnesium.
Nonmedicinal Therapies
Strong Evidence for Efficacy (Wait-List or Flexibility
Controls But Not Blinded Trials)
Cardiovascular exercise: efficacy not maintained
if exercise stops. 66-75
CBT: improvement often sustained for months.83-87
Patient education: group format using lectures, written
materials, demonstrations; improvement sustained for 3 to 12 months.32-36
Multidisciplinary therapy, such as exercise and CBT
or education and exercise.76-78,91-98
Moderate Evidence for Efficacy
Weak Evidence for Efficacy
No Evidence for Efficacy
CBT indicates cognitive behavioral therapy; RCT, randomized controlled
trial; SSRI, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; SNRI, serotonin and norepinephrine
reuptake inhibitor.
Although likely to change in the future, none of the drugs reviewed
here are currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for treatment
of FMS. Many of these drugs are older agents for which approval is unlikely
to be sought. Furthermore, the Food and Drug Administration is just beginning
to consider the parameters on which approval of a drug for treatment of FMS
could be granted (J. Witter, written communication, June 2003).
Tricyclic Antidepressant Medications. The strongest evidence for medication efficacy in FMS is for tricyclic
antidepressant medications, particularly amitriptyline and cyclobenzaprine.
In 1986, 2 RCTs demonstrated modest effectiveness of amitriptyline (25-50
mg at bedtime).37,38 Other RCTs
confirmed these results during the next decade.39 Cyclobenzaprine,
usually marketed as a muscle relaxant but structurally a tricyclic compound,
has also been effective in RCTs lasting 6 to 12 weeks.39-41 The
usual dose of cyclobenzaprine found to be effective in FMS has been 10 to
40 mg/d. A recent meta-analysis confirmed the efficacy of cyclobenzaprine
in FMS.41
Two meta-analyses found that tricyclic antidepressants were better than
placebo in the treatment of FMS. Arnold and Keck42 found
9 of 16 studies suitable for meta-analysis. Tricyclic agents were more effective
than placebo for all clinical outcomes, especially quality of sleep. A significant
clinical response was observed in 25% to 37% of patients with FMS and the
overall degree of efficacy was modest. A second meta-analysis also found that
antidepressants improved sleep, fatigue, pain, and sense of well-being, but
there was no improvement in tender-point pain.43 Both
meta-analyses found better evidence for the efficacy of tricyclic medications
than other classes of antidepressants. Most of these RCTs were of short duration,
6 to 12 weeks. The longest study of tricyclic medications followed up 208
patients treated with amitriptyline, cyclobenzaprine, or placebo for 6 months
and reported that the initial improvement at 6 and 12 weeks was lost at 26
weeks.39
Other Antidepressant Medications. There is moderate evidence that the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor
(SSRI) fluoxetine is effective in FMS. In 1 article of 42 patients with fibromyalgia,
there was no significant benefit of fluoxetine (20 mg/d) compared with placebo
over a 6-week period.44 However, a flexible
placebo-controlled dose study of fluoxetine (<80 mg/d) demonstrated significant
efficacy in 60 women with fibromyalgia.45 Improvement
was noted on FIQ total score as well as subscores for pain, fatigue, and depression.
Pain in tender points and total myalgic scores were not significantly improved.
There was no difference in the measures of mood disturbances in the 2 groups
and the effect of fluoxetine on pain was still significant after adjustment
for change in depression score.
A crossover trial found that fluoxetine (20 mg/d) as well as amitriptyline
(25 mg/d) were better than placebo in a number of outcome measures in patients
with FMS.46 The combination of the 2 medications
was better than either alone. Similar results were noted with fluoxetine (20
mg) combined with cyclobenzaprine (10 mg) over a 12-week period.47 In
1 controlled study, sertraline (50 mg) was as effective as amitriptyline (25
mg).48
Recent RCTs of dual serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors
(SNRIs) have been undertaken. An RCT of 90 patients with FMS found that venlafaxine
(75 mg/d) was not significantly different from placebo49;
however, it was found useful in 2 small open-label studies using higher doses.50,51 Two new SNRIs, milnacipran and duloxetine,
demonstrated efficacy in a number of outcome variables in 2 high-quality multicenter
RCTs. Milnacipran, twice daily, improved pain and other outcome measures in
125 patients with FMS over 12 weeks.52 Duloxetine
(60 mg twice daily) was better than placebo in FIQ scores and a number of
other outcomes, independent of its effect on mood, in 207 patients with FMS
over 3 months.53
Analgesic Medications. Tramadol, with or without
acetaminophen, has been effective in 3 RCTs in patients with FMS.54-56 A small double-blind,
placebo-controlled trial initially suggested that tramadol is effective and
well-tolerated in patients with FMS.54 A larger
RCT reported decreased visual analog pain scores, improved pain relief, and
decreased pain threshold after tramadol treatment.55 The
most recent article compared a combination of 37.5-mg tramadol/325-mg acetaminophen
tablets with placebo in 315 patients with FMS.56 Discontinuation
rates, pain scores, and the FIQ scores were better in the tramadol/acetaminophen
group compared with patients receiving placebo.
There is no evidence that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are effective
when used alone in FMS, although they may be useful adjuncts for analgesia
when combined with tricyclic medications.38 There
have been no RCTs of opioids in patients with FMS. Opioids should be considered
only after all other medicinal and nonmedicinal therapies have been exhausted.
Anticonvulsant Medications. Although gabepentin
is currently undergoing an RCT, no trials have yet been reported in patients
with FMS. However, pregabalin, a second-generation anticonvulsant, has been
found to be effective in FMS in an RCT.57 This
multicenter trial compared various doses of pregabalin in 529 patients with
FMS. Pregabalin (450 mg/d) significantly reduced the average severity of pain
compared with placebo (mean difference, –0.93; P<.001)
and significantly more patients had a more than 50% improvement in pain. There
were also significant improvements in sleep, fatigue, and health-related quality
of life.
Other Medications. Tropisetron, a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3
receptor antagonist, and 5-hydroxytryptophan, an intermediate metabolite of L-tryptophan, were more effective than placebo in RCTs.58-60 S-adenosylmethionine,
an agent with both anti-inflammatory and antidepressant effects, was found
helpful in one study but performed no better than placebo in a second study
in patients with FMS.61 There has been no evidence
that benzodiazepenes or nonbenzodiazepene sedatives are effective in patients
with FMS other than their role in sleep disturbances.
Hormones and Supplements. The only controlled
study of corticosteroids in patients with FMS reported that 10 mg of prednisone
daily was not effective.62 Administration of
parenteral growth hormone to patients with FMS who had low levels of growth
hormone improved function modestly.63 There
are no data from RCTs to support the use of thyroid hormone, dehydroepiandrosterone,
melatonin, or calcitonin in the treatment of FMS. Dietary modifications, nutritional
supplements, magnesium, herbal, and vitamin therapy have not been adequately
evaluated in FMS. The only RCT of guaifenesin found no significant effects
on pain, other symptoms, or laboratory measures in a 12-month study.64
Nonmedicinal Therapy
Exercise. There is strong evidence that cardiovascular
exercise is effective treatment in FMS. The therapeutic benefit of exercise
for individuals with fibromyalgia was first recognized 20 years ago when patients
randomized to 20 weeks of high-intensity exercise had greater improvements
in fitness, tender point pain thresholds, and global assessment ratings than
did patients randomized to flexibility training.65,66 The
benefits of aerobic exercise67-71 and
muscle strengthening72 have subsequently been
confirmed in FMS clinical trials. Pool exercise has been well-tolerated and
especially helpful.70,73,74
Busch et al75 performed a systematic
review of 16 exercise trials involving a total of 724 participants with FMS
and compared exercise intervention groups (n = 379), control groups
(n = 277), or groups receiving an alternate treatment (n = 68).
The studies were classified by whether they used exercise alone or combined
exercise with a nonexercise component (composite intervention). Exercise-only
interventions were subdivided according to whether the intervention involved
1 type of exercise (aerobic training, strength training, or flexibility training)
or more than 1 type of exercise (mixed exercise). Studies were considered
to be high quality if their methods were adequate and also met criteria for
adequate training stimuli, as determined by American College of Sports Medicine
guidelines. Seven studies65,67,76-80 were
high-quality training studies: 4 aerobic training, with 1 a mixture of aerobic,
strength, and flexibility training; 1 strength training; and 2 with exercise
training as part of a composite treatment. The 4 high-quality aerobic training
studies used cycle ergometry, aerobic dance, whole-body aerobics, and walking
indoors.65,76-78
Quiz Ref IDOverall, there was greater improvement in the exercise
groups vs control groups in aerobic performance (17.1% increase in aerobic
performance with exercise vs 0.5% increase in the control groups), tender-point
pain pressure threshold (28.1% increase vs 7.0% decrease), and improvements
in pain (11.4% decrease in pain vs 1.6% increase). One strength training intervention
found significant improvement in pain and function.79 One
trial using walking, strengthening, and flexibility found significant improvements
in tender-point pain pressure threshold and aerobic performance but not in
global well-being or self-efficacy.80
Two high-quality studies combined exercise with at least 1 other nonexercise
intervention. Gowans et al67 reported significant
improvements in aerobic performance, global well-being, fatigue, and sleep
in patients with FMS who received education and aerobic training compared
with wait-list controls. Significant improvements were found in tender-point
pain, self-reported physical function, and self-efficacy for function in an
aerobic training plus biofeedback group compared with the control group.76 Stretching has not been adequately tested but aerobic
fitness training was better than stretching exercises in pain, depression,
and function, as well as physical fitness.81,82
Cognitive Therapies. There is strong evidence
that psychological and behavioral therapy, especially cognitive behavioral
therapy (CBT), is effective in FMS. Randomized controlled trials of CBT with
longitudinal data over 6 to 30 months found decreased pain severity and improved
function in FMS.83-87 Improvement
was also noted in 3 RCTs of meditation, relaxation, and stress management.78,88,89 Most control groups
were wait-listed or education controls. Systematic reviews have confirmed
that CBT improved pain, fatigue, mood, and function in FMS.90,91
Multidisciplinary Treatment. Quiz Ref IDThere is strong evidence that multidisciplinary treatment is effective in
treating FMS. Five RCTs of multidisciplinary treatment that combined education,
CBT, or both with exercise found beneficial effects on patient self-efficacy,
overall FMS impact as measured by the FIQ, significant decreases in pain,
and improvements on a 6-minute walk.33,67,73,74,92,93 Treatment
length ranged from 6 to 24 weeks. One RCT studied the effects of a 6-week
biofeedback therapy in combination with education, CBT, and exercise and found
the combination better than the education attention control group on self-efficacy
and tender points.76 Significant improvements
in pain severity, physical activity, and physician rating of disease severity
were also noted in the combination group. Each of these RCTs collected
follow-up data between 3 months and 2 years after completion of the experimental
treatment. In all of these RCTs, treatment gains were maintained.
Six uncontrolled single-group pretest-posttest clinical trials, using
multidisciplinary approaches and ranging in length from 1.5 days to 24 weeks,
have found significant positive changes in the FIQ, pain severity, self-efficacy,
and the 6-minute walk.83,84,86,94-97 Five
of these trials had a follow-up component between 2 and 30 months after the
end of the trial.86,94-96 Improvements
in the outcomes were maintained in 3 trials while the other 2 trials did not
maintain improvements in the primary outcome of visual analog scale pain but
the other outcome measures did improve.
Other Treatments. Although commonly used, there
are no RCTs of trigger-point and tender-point injections in patients with
FMS. Uncontrolled articles suggest that dry needling or soft-tissue injections
with lidocaine or saline are equally effective. There is some evidence to
support the use of relaxation techniques, biofeedback, and hypnosis in patients
with FMS. In 1 study,98 patients had less pain
during deep relaxation and pleasant imagery than the control group did. Eight
sessions of hypnotherapy delivered over 12 weeks improved visual analog scale
pain ratings, fatigue, sleep, and global assessment.99 A
third study using hypnotically induced analgesia found that patients experienced
less pain during hypnosis than at rest.100 Subcortical
cerebral blood flow increased in the patients who were treated. Electromyogram
biofeedback was moderately effective in decreasing pain ratings and tender-point
counts.101-103
There is modest evidence to support the use of acupuncture in patients
with FMS. A review of 7 studies reported increased pain thresholds and decreased
pain ratings and medication use with acupuncture treatment.104 One
high-quality RCT of electroacupuncture found that along with positive changes
in pain perception and sleep quality, pain threshold improved by 70% in the
treated group compared with only 4% in the sham acupuncture control group.105 However, a recent RCT reported equal improvement
in sham compared with traditional acupuncture.106
Chiropractic spinal manipulation and soft-tissue massage decreased tenderness
in patients with FMS.107,108 The
chiropractic manipulation was a pilot uncontrolled trial but the massage trial
comprised 16 patients with active treatment compared with 13 controls who
received discussion group intervention. Connective tissue manipulation and
massage has produced positive results by reducing depression, pain intensity,
and amount of analgesics used.108,109 Combined
ultrasound and inferential current improved pain levels and sleep compared
with sham treatment.110 Two Israeli RCTs concluded
that medicinal baths (Dead Sea sulfur baths) resulted in relief of FMS-related
symptoms of pain, fatigue, stiffness, and tender points.111,112
Conclusions and recommendations for future treatment trials
There is strong evidence to support the use of low-dose tricyclic medications,
such as amitriptyline and cyclobenzaprine, as well as cardiovascular exercise,
CBT, patient education, or a combination of these for the management of FMS.
There is moderate evidence that tramadol, SSRIs, SNRIs, and certain anticonvulsants
are effective but the complete results of some trials are not available and
systematic reviews have not been reported. Moderate evidence exists for the
efficacy of strength training exercise, acupuncture, hypnotherapy, biofeedback,
massage, and warm water baths. Many of the commonly used FMS therapies have
not been carefully evaluated. Based on these reports, a stepwise FMS management
guideline can be recommended (Box
2).
Step 1
Step 2
Trial with low-dose tricyclic antidepressant or cyclobenzaprine.
Begin cardiovascular fitness exercise program.
Refer for cognitive behavior therapy or combine that
with exercise.
Step 3
Specialty referral (eg, rheumatologist, physiatrist,
psychiatrist, pain management).
Trials with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor,
serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, or tramadol.
Consider combination medication trial or anticonvulsant.
The FMS diagnosis first must be confirmed and the condition explained
to the patient and family. Any comorbid illness, such as mood disturbances
or primary sleep disturbances, should be identified and treated. Medications
to consider initially are low doses of tricyclic antidepressants or cyclobenzaprine.
Some SSRIs, SNRIs, or anticonvulsants may become first-line FMS medications
as more RCTs are reported. All patients with FMS should begin a cardiovascular
exercise program. Most patients will benefit from CBT or stress reduction
with relaxation training. A multidisciplinary approach combining each of these
modalities may be the most beneficial. Other medications such as tramadol
or combinations of medications should be considered. Patients with FMS not
responding well to these steps should be referred to a rheumatologist, physiatrist,
psychiatrist, or pain management specialist.
Quiz Ref IDThere are important shortcomings in the FMS treatment
literature. Most medication trials have been short, such as 6 to 12 weeks.
Fibromyalgia syndrome is a chronic illness. There is strong evidence for effective
FMS treatments in the short-term but more studies need to determine whether
the improvement is maintained over months or years. Many of the medication
trials had methodological problems, including inadequate blinding, small number
of patients, and nonstandardized outcome measures. Exercise and
CBT trials were of longer duration and their efficacy often persisted for
up to 24 weeks. Such interventions cannot be adequately blinded, although
appropriate control groups were evaluated. These same issues have been noted
in clinical trials of other chronic idiopathic illnesses, such as headaches
and irritable bowel syndrome.
Much of the treatment response differences in FMS clinical trials may
be related to the heterogeneity of this illness. No therapeutic trials have
included patients with FMS who also have a rheumatic disease, such as rheumatoid
arthritis or systemic lupus erythematosus. Recent work has identified subgroups
of patients with FMS on the basis of psychosocial status and biological response
to pain.96,113 The ability of
patients with FMS to self-manage pain correlated with their functional status.114 In another study, brain imaging and broad psychological
profiles were used to identify 4 FMS patient subgroups.115 Such
studies suggest that certain treatments may be differentially effective in
individual patients. For example, interventions impacting central pain mechanisms
may be most effective in those with few neuropsychological symptoms while
therapies that affect many central nervous system pathways may be best suited
to patients reporting multiple symptom domains.
Evaluation of multidisciplinary management has been especially challenging.
Very few trials attempted to combine medication and nonpharmacological treatments.98,116 Several nonmedicinal trials maintained
stable drug doses during the clinical trial but failed to evaluate drug efficacy.
Future RCTs in FMS using multidisciplinary therapies should include medications,
and future clinical trials should use a core set of outcome measures. International
efforts are under way to establish a working definition of optimal FMS outcome
measures. Complete protocols for all treatments, including both pharmacological
and nonmedicinal therapies, should be delineated so that replication can be
accomplished with some certainty.
As we learn more about pathophysiologic and genetic mechanisms, there
will be enormous opportunities to develop therapies that improve health-related
quality of life in patients with FMS. An ongoing challenge will be to define
individual patient characteristics and subgroups that will respond best to
a specific therapy. Techniques such as individualized patient trials can be
widely applied in the clinic and are especially useful in conditions such
as FMS.117,118 Like any complex
chronic pain syndrome, FMS cannot be effectively treated with one approach
to intervention. This fits with the heterogeneity of the illness and the complexity
of evaluating its outcome. Optimal FMS management requires a combination of
pharmacological and nonmedicinal therapies best arrived at when patients and
health care professionals work as a team.
Corresponding Author: Don L. Goldenberg,
MD, Department of Rheumatology, Newton-Wellesley Hospital, 2000 Washington
St, Newton, MA 02462 (dgoldenb@massmed.org).
Funding/Support: This study was sponsored by
the American Pain Society.
Role of the Sponsor: The American Pain Society
did not participate in the design and conduct of the study, in the collection,
analysis, and interpretation of the data, or in the preparation, review, or
approval of the manuscript.
Acknowledgment: We thank the other members
of the American Pain Society Fibromyalgia Panel: Robert Gerwin, MD, Department
of Neurology, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Md; Sue Gowans, PhD,
PT, University Health Network Toronto General Hospital, Department of Rehabilitation
Services, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Kenneth C. Jackson II, PharmD, Practice-Pain
Management, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center at Amarillo, School
of Pharmacy, Lubbock; Pearl Kugel, BBA, San Diego, Calif; William McCarberg,
MD, Chronic Pain Management Program, Kaiser Permanente, Escondido, Calif;
Nathan J. Rudin, MD, Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University
of Wisconsin Medical School, Madison; Laura Schanberg, MD, Pediatric Rheumatology
Division, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Ann G. Taylor, RN, EdD,
Betty Norman Norris Professor of Nursing, Center for the Study of Complementary
and Alternative Therapies, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville;
Janalee Taylor, MS, RN, Clinical Nurse Specialist, Children’s Hospital
Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio; and Dennis C. Turk, PhD, Department of Anesthesiology,
University of Washington, Seattle. We also thank staff members of the American
Pain Society and especially Ada Jacox, PhD, RN, and Carol D. Spengler, PhD,
RN, APS Clinical Practice Guidelines Program, University of Virginia School
of Nursing, Charlottesville; and the many reviewers and staff who worked on
the APS fibromyalgia syndrome document.
1.Croft P, Rigby AS, Boswell R.
et al. The prevalence of chronic widespread pain in the general population.
J Rheumatol. 1993;20:710-7138496870
Google Scholar 2.Croft P, Schollum J, Silman A. Population study of tender point counts and pain as evidence of fibromyalgia.
BMJ. 1994;309:696-6997950521
Google ScholarCrossref 3.Wolfe F, Smythe HA, Yunus MB.
et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification
of fibromyalgia: report of the Multicenter Criteria Committee.
Arthritis Rheum. 1990;33:160-1722306288
Google ScholarCrossref 4.Wolfe F, Cathey MA. Prevalence of primary and secondary fibrositis.
J Rheumatol. 1983;10:965-9686582268
Google Scholar 5.Wolfe F, Cathey MA. The epidemiology of tender points.
J Rheumatol. 1985;12:1164-11683879278
Google Scholar 6.Marder WD, Meenan RF, Felson DT.
et al. Editorial: the present and future adequacy of rheumatology manpower:
a study of health care needs and physician supply.
Arthritis Rheum. 1991;34:1209-12171930309
Google ScholarCrossref 7.Crofford LJ, Clauw DJ. Fibromyalgia: where are we a decade after the American College of Rheumatology
classification criteria were developed?
Arthritis Rheum. 2002;46:1136-113812115214
Google ScholarCrossref 8.Kroenke K, Harris L. Symptoms research: a fertile field.
Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:801-80211346313
Google ScholarCrossref 9.Hudson JI, Mangweth B, Pope HG Jr.
et al. Family study of affective spectrum disorder.
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2003;60:170-17712578434
Google ScholarCrossref 10.Gracely RH, Petzke F, Wolf JM, Clauw DJ. Functional magnetic resonance imaging evidence of augmented pain processing
in fibromyalgia.
Arthritis Rheum. 2002;46:1333-134312115241
Google ScholarCrossref 11.Geisser ME, Casey KL, Brucksch CB.
et al. Perception of noxious and innocuous heat stimulation among healthy
women and women with fibromyalgia.
Pain. 2003;102:243-25012670665
Google ScholarCrossref 12.Price DD, Staud R, Robinson ME.
et al. Enhanced temporal summation of second pain and its central modulation
in fibromyalgia patients.
Pain. 2002;99:49-5912237183
Google ScholarCrossref 13.Staud R, Cannon RC. Temporal summation of pain from mechanical stimulation of muscle tissue
in normal controls and subjects with fibromyalgia syndrome.
Pain. 2003;102:87-9512620600
Google ScholarCrossref 14.Mountz JM, Bradley LA, Modell JG.
et al. Fibromyalgia in women: abnormalities of regional cerebral blood flow
in the thalamus and the caudate nucleus are associated with low pain threshold
levels.
Arthritis Rheum. 1995;38:926-9387612042
Google ScholarCrossref 15.Bradley LA, Mckendree-Smith NL, Alarcon GS, Cianfrini L. Is fibromyalgia a neurologic disease?
Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2002;6:106-11411872181
Google ScholarCrossref 16.Gracely RH, Grant MA, Giesecke T. Evoked pain measures in fibromyalgia.
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2003;17:593-60912849714
Google ScholarCrossref 17.Russell IJ, Orr MD, Littman B.
et al. Elevated cerebrospinal fluid levels of substance P in patients with
the fibromyalgia syndrome.
Arthritis Rheum. 1994;37:1593-16017526868
Google ScholarCrossref 18.Offenbaecher M, Bondy B, Dejonge S.
et al. Possible association of fibromyalgia with a polymorphism in the serotonin
transporter gene regulatory region.
Arthritis Rheum. 1999;42:2482-248810555044
Google ScholarCrossref 19.Gursoy S, Erdal E, Herken H, Madenci E, Alasehirli B. Association of T102C polymorphism of the 5-HT2A receptor gene with
psychiatric status in fibromyalgia syndrome.
Rheumatol Int. 2001;21:58-6111732859
Google ScholarCrossref 20.Gursoy S, Erdal E, Herken H, Madenci E, Alaaehirli B, Erdal N. Significance of catechol-O-methyltransferase gene polymorphism in fibromyalgia
syndrome.
Rheumatol Int. 2003;23:104-10712739038
Google Scholar 21.Adler GK, Kinsley Bt, Hurwitz S.
et al. Reduced hypothalamic-pituitary and sympathoadrenal responses to hypoglycemia
in women with fibromyalgia syndrome.
Am J Med. 1999;106:534-54310335725
Google ScholarCrossref 22.Crofford LJ, Pillemer SR, Kalogeras KT.
et al. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis perturbations in patients with
fibromyalgia.
Arthritis Rheum. 1994;37:1583-15927980669
Google ScholarCrossref 23.Martinez-Lavin M, Hermosillo A, Rosas M, Soto M. Circadian studies of autonomic nervous balance in patients with fibromyalgia.
Arthritis Rheum. 1998;41:1966-19719811051
Google ScholarCrossref 24.Benjamin S, Morris S, Mcbeth J.
et al. The association between chronic widespread pain and mental disorder.
Arthritis Rheum. 2000;43:561-56710728749
Google ScholarCrossref 25.Ehrlich GE. Pain is real; fibromyalgia isn't.
J Rheumatol. 2003;30:1666-166712913918
Google Scholar 26.Goldenberg D, Smith N. Fibromyalgia, rheumatologists, and the medical literature: a shaky
alliance.
J Rheumatol. 2003;30:151-15312508405
Google Scholar 27.Burckhardt CS, Clark SR, Bennett RM. The fibromyalgia impact questionnaire: development and validation.
J Rheumatol. 1991;18:728-7331865419
Google Scholar 28.Dunkl PR, Taylor AG, Mcconnell GG.
et al. Responsiveness of fibromyalgia clinical trial outcome measures.
J Rheumatol. 2000;27:2683-269111093454
Google Scholar 29.Beck AT, Steer RA, Ball R, Ranieri W. Comparison of Beck Depression Inventories IA and II in psychiatric
outpatients.
J Pers Assess. 1996;67:588-5978991972
Google ScholarCrossref 31.White KP, Nielson WR, Harth M, Ostbye T, Speechley M. Does the label “fibromyalgia” alter health status, function,
and health service utilization?
Arthritis Rheum. 2002;47:260-26512115155
Google ScholarCrossref 32.Nicassio PM, Radojevic V, Weisman MH.
et al. A comparison of behavioral and educational interventions for fibromyalgia.
J Rheumatol. 1997;24:2000-20079330945
Google Scholar 33.Burckhardt CS, Mannerkorpi K, Hedenberg L, Bjelle AA. Randomized, controlled clinical trial of education and physical training
for women with fibromyalgia.
J Rheumatol. 1994;21:714-7208035399
Google Scholar 34.Burckhardt CS, Bjelle A. Education programmes for fibromyalgia patients: description and evaluation.
Baillieres Clin Rheumatol. 1994;8:935-9557850887
Google ScholarCrossref 35.Alamo M, Moral RR, Perula de Torres LA. Evaluation of a patient-centered approach in generalized musculoskeletal
chronic pain/fibromyalgia patients in primary care.
Patient Educ Couns. 2002;48:23-3112220747
Google ScholarCrossref 36.Pfeiffer A, Thompson JM, Nelson A.
et al. Effects of a 1.5-day multidiscplinary outpatient treatment program
for fibromyalgia: a pilot study.
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;82:186-19112595770
Google Scholar 37.Carette S, Mccain GA, Bell DA, Fam AG. Evaluation of amitriptyline in primary fibrositis.
Arthritis Rheum. 1986;29:655-6593521612
Google ScholarCrossref 38.Goldenberg DL, Felson DT, Dinerman HA. Randomized, controlled trial of amitriptyline and naproxen in the treatment
of patients with fibromyalgia.
Arthritis Rheum. 1986;29:1371-13773535811
Google ScholarCrossref 39.Carette S, Bell MJ, Reynolds WJ.
et al. Comparison of amitriptyline, cyclobenzaprine, and placebo in the treatment
of fibromyalgia: a randomized, double-blind clinical trial.
Arthritis Rheum. 1994;37:32-408129762
Google ScholarCrossref 40.Bennett RM, Gatter RA, Campbell SM.
et al. A comparison of cyclobenzaprine and placebo in the management of fibrositis.
Arthritis Rheum. 1988;31:1535-15423058130
Google ScholarCrossref 41.Tofferi JK, Jackson JL, O'Malley PG. Treatment of fibromyalgia with cyclobenzaprine: a meta-analysis.
Arthritis Rheum. 2004;51:9-1314872449
Google ScholarCrossref 42.Arnold LM, Keck PE. Antidepressant treatment of fibromyalgia: a meta-analysis and review.
Psychosomatics. 2000;41:104-11310749947
Google ScholarCrossref 43.O'Malley PG, Balden E, Tomkins G.
et al. Treatment of fibromyalgia with antidepressants.
J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:659-66611029681
Google ScholarCrossref 44.Wolfe F, Cathey MA, Hawley DJA. Double-blind placebo controlled trial of fluoxetine in fibromyalgia.
Scand J Rheumatol. 1994;23:255-2597973479
Google ScholarCrossref 45.Arnold LM, Hess EV, Hudson JI, Berno SE, Keck PEA. Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, flexible-dose study of
fluoxetine in the treatment of women with fibromyalgia.
Am J Med. 2002;112:191-19711893345
Google ScholarCrossref 46.Goldenberg D, Mayskiy M, Mossey CJ, Ruthazer R, Schmid CA. Randomized, double-blind crossover trial of fluoxetine and amitriptyline
in the treatment of fibromyalgia.
Arthritis Rheum. 1996;39:1852-18598912507
Google ScholarCrossref 47.Cantini F, Bellandi F, Niccolo L.
et al. Fluoxetine combined with cyclobenzaprine in the treatment of fibromyalgia.
Minerva Med. 1994;85:97-1008196850
Google Scholar 48.Celiker R, Cagavi Z. Comparison of amitriptyline and sertraline in the treatment of fibromyalgia
syndrome [abstract].
Arthritis Rheum. 2000;43:S332
Google Scholar 49.Zijsltra TR, Barendregt PJ, van de Laar MA. Venlafaxine in fibromyalgia: results of a randomized placebo-controlled,
double-blind trial [abstract].
Arthritis Rheum. 2002;46:S105
Google Scholar 50.Dwight MM, Arnold LM, O’Brien H.
et al. An open clinical trial of venlafaxine treatment of fibromyalgia.
Psychosomatics. 1998;39:14-179538670
Google ScholarCrossref 51.Sayar K, Aksu G, Ak I, Tosum M. Venlafaxine treatment of fibromyalgia.
Ann Pharmacother. 2003;37:1561-156514565792
Google ScholarCrossref 52.Gendreau RM, Mease PJ, Rao SR, Kranzler JD, Clauw DJ. Minacipran: a potential new treatment of fibromyalgia [abstract].
Arthritis Rheum. 2003;48:S616
Google Scholar 53.Arnold LM, Lu Y, Crofford LJ.
et al. A double-blind multicenter trial comparing duloxetine to placebo in
the treatment of fibromyalgia with or without major depressive disorder.
Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50:2974-2984
Google ScholarCrossref 54.Biasi G, Manca S, Manganelli S, Marcolongo R. Tramadol in the fibromyalgia syndrome: a controlled clinical trial
versus placebo.
Int J Clin Pharmacol Res. 1998;18:13-199604730
Google Scholar 55.Russell J, Kamin M, Bennet RM.
et al. Efficacy of tramadol in treatment of pain in fibromyalgia.
J Clin Rheumatol. 2000;6:250-257
Google ScholarCrossref 56.Bennett RM, Kamin M, Karin R, Rosenthal N. Tramadol and acetaminophen combination tablets in the treatment of
fibromyalgia pain.
Am J Med. 2003;114:537-54512753877
Google ScholarCrossref 57.Crofford L, Russell IJ, Mease P.
et al. Pregabalin improves pain associated with fibromyalgia syndrome in a
multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled monotherapy trial [abstract].
Arthritis Rheum. 2002;46:S613
Google ScholarCrossref 58.Spath M, Stratz T, Neeck G.
et al. Efficacy and tolerability of intravenous tropisetron in the treatment
of fibromyalgia.
Scand J Rheumatol. 2004;33:267-27015370724
Google ScholarCrossref 59.Caruso I, Sarzi Puttini P, Cazzola M, Azzolini V. Double-blind study of 5-hydroxytryptophan versus placebo in the treatment
of primary fibromyalgia syndrome.
J Int Med Res. 1990;18:201-2092193835
Google Scholar 60.Puttini PS, Caruso I. Primary fibromyalgia syndrome and 5-hydroxy-L-tryptophan: a 90-day
open study.
J Int Med Res. 1992;20:182-1891521674
Google Scholar 61.Volkmann H, Norregaard J, Jacobsen S.
et al. Double-blind, placebo-controlled cross-over study of intravenous S-adenosyl-L-methionine
in patients with fibromyalgia.
Scand J Rheumatol. 1997;26:206-2119225876
Google ScholarCrossref 62.Clark S, Tindall E, Bennett RM. A double blind crossover trial of prednisone versus placebo in the
treatment of fibrositis.
J Rheumatol. 1985;12:980-9833910836
Google Scholar 63.Bennett RM, Clark SC, Walczyk JA. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of growth hormone
in the treatment of fibromyalgia.
Am J Med. 1998;104:227-2319552084
Google ScholarCrossref 64.Bennett RM, Degarmo P, Clark SR. A one year double blind placebo controlled study of guaifenesin in
fibromyalgia [abstract].
Arthritis Rheum. 1996;39:S212
Google ScholarCrossref 65.McCain GA, Bell DA, Mai FM.
et al. A controlled study of the effects of a supervised cardiovascular fitness
training program on the manifestations of primary fibromyalgia.
Arthritis Rheum. 1988;31:1135-11413048273
Google ScholarCrossref 66.McCain GA. Role of physical fitness training in the fibrositis/fibromyalgia syndrome.
Am J Med. 1986;81:73-773532784
Google ScholarCrossref 67.Gowans SE, Dehueck A, Voss S, Richardson M. A randomized controlled trial of exercise and education for individuals
with fibromyalgia.
Arthritis Care Res. 1999;12:120-12810513500
Google ScholarCrossref 68.Gowans SE, DeHueck A, Voss S.
et al. Effect of a randomized, controlled trial of exercise on mood and physical
function in individuals with fibromyalgia.
Arthritis Rheum. 2001;45:519-52911762686
Google ScholarCrossref 69.Gowans SE, Dehueck A, Abbey S. Measuring exercise-induced mood changes in fibromyalgia.
Arthritis Rheum. 2002;47:603-60912522833
Google ScholarCrossref 70.Jentoft ES, Kvalvik AG, Mengshoel AM. Effects of pool-based and land-based aerobic exercise on women with
fibromyalgia/chronic widespread muscle pain.
Arthritis Rheum. 2001;45:42-4711308060
Google ScholarCrossref 71.Schachter CL, Busch AJ, Peloso PM, Sheppard MS. Effects of short versus long bouts of aerobic exercise in sedentary
women with fibromyalgia: a randomized controlled trial.
Phys Ther. 2003;83:340-35812665405
Google Scholar 72.Jones KD, Burckhardt C, Clark SR, Bennett RM, Potempa KM. A randomized controlled trial of muscle strengthening versus flexibility
training in fibromyalgia.
J Rheumatol. 2002;29:1041-104812022321
Google Scholar 73.Mannerkorpi K, Nyberg B, Ekdahl C. Pool exercise combined with an education program for patients with
fibromyalgia syndrome: a prospective, randomized study.
J Rheumatol. 2000;27:2473-248111036846
Google Scholar 74.Mannerkorpi K, Ahlmen M, Ekdahl C. Six- and 24-month follow-up of pool exercise therapy and education
for patients with fibromyalgia.
Scand J Rheumatol. 2002;31:306-31012455823
Google ScholarCrossref 75.Busch A, Schachter CL, Peloso PM, Bombardier C. Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002(3):CD003786
76.Buckelew SP, Conway R, Parker J.
et al. Biofeedback/relaxation training and exercise interventions for fibromyalgia.
Arthritis Care Res. 1998;11:196-2099782811
Google ScholarCrossref 77.Mengshoel AM, Komnæs HB, Fqrre Æ. The effects of 20 weeks of physical fitness training in female patients
with fibromyalgia.
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 1992;10:345-3491395219
Google Scholar 78.Wigers SH, Stiles TC, Vogal PA. Effects of aerobic exercise versus stress management treatment in fibromyalgia.
Scand J Rheumatol. 1996;25:77-868614771
Google ScholarCrossref 79.Hakkinen A, Hakkinen K, Alen M. Strength training induced adaptations in neuromuscular function of
premenopausal women with fibromyalgia.
Ann Rheum Dis. 2001;60:21-2611114277
Google ScholarCrossref 80.Martin L, Nutting A, Macintosh BR, Edworthy SM, Butterwick D, Cook J. An exercise program in the treatment of fibromyalgia.
J Rheumatol. 1996;23:1050-10538782139
Google Scholar 81.Mannerkorpi K, Iversen MD. Physical exercise in fibromyalgia and related syndromes.
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2003;17:629-64712849716
Google ScholarCrossref 82.Valim V, Oliveira L, Suda A.
et al. Aerobic fitness effects in fibromyalgia.
J Rheumatol. 2003;30:1060-106912734907
Google Scholar 83.Nielson WR, Walker C, Mccain GA. Cognitive behavioral treatment of fibromyalgia syndrome: preliminary
findings.
J Rheumatol. 1992;19:98-1031556709
Google Scholar 84.White KP, Nielson WR. Cognitive behavioral treatment of fibromyalgia syndrome: a follow-up
assessement.
J Rheumatol. 1995;22:717-7217791170
Google Scholar 85.Hadhazy V, Ezzo JM, Berman BM, Creamer P, Bausell B. Mind and body therapy for fibromyalgia: a systematic review.
J Rheumatol. 2000;27:2911-291811128685
Google Scholar 86.Creamer P, Singh BB, Hochberg MC, Berman BM. Sustained improvement produced by nonpharmacologic intervention in
fibromyalgia: results of a pilot study.
Arthritis Care Res. 2000;13:198-20414635274
Google ScholarCrossref 87.Singh BB, Berman BM, Creamer P. A pilot study of cognitive behavioral therapy in fibromyalgia.
Altern Ther Health Med. 1998;4:67-709682514
Google Scholar 88.Kaplan KH, Goldenberg DL, Galvin-Nadeau M. The impact of a meditation-based stress reduction program on fibromyalgia.
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1993;15:284-2898307341
Google ScholarCrossref 89.De Gier M, Peters ML, Vlaeyan JW. Fear of pain, physical performance, and attentional processes in patients
with fibromyalgia.
Pain. 2003;104:121-13012855321
Google ScholarCrossref 90.Williams DA. Psychological and behavioural therapies in fibromyalgia and related
syndromes.
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2003;17:649-66512849717
Google ScholarCrossref 91.Rossy LA, Buckelew SP, Dorr N.
et al. A meta-analysis of fibromyalgia treatment interventions.
Ann Behav Med. 1999;21:180-19110499139
Google ScholarCrossref 92.Keel PJ, Bodoky C, Gerhard U, Muller W. Comparison of integrated group therapy and group relaxation training
for fibromyalgia.
Clin J Pain. 1998;14:232-2389758073
Google ScholarCrossref 93.King SJ, Wessel J, Bhambhani Y, Sholter D, Maksymowych W. The effects of exercise and education, individually or combined, in
women with fibromyalgia.
J Rheumatol. 2002;29:2620-262712465163
Google Scholar 94.Mengshoel AM, Forseth KO, Haugen M.
et al. Multidisciplinary approach to fibromyalgia: a pilot study.
Clin Rheumatol. 1995;14:165-1707789057
Google ScholarCrossref 95.Bennett RM. Multidisciplinary group programs to treat fibromyalgia patients.
Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 1996;22:351-3678860803
Google ScholarCrossref 96.Turk DC, Okifuji A, Sinclair JD, Starz TW. Differential responses by psychosocial subgroups of fibromyalgia syndrome
patients to an interdisciplanary treatment.
Arthritis Care Res. 1998;11:397-4049830884
Google ScholarCrossref 97.Bailey A, Starr L, Alderson M, Moreland J. A comparative evaluation of a fibromyalgia rehabilitation program.
Arthritis Care Res. 1999;12:336-34011081003
Google ScholarCrossref 98.Fors EA, Sexton H, Gotestam KG. The effect of guided imagery and amitriptyline on daily fibromyalgia
pain.
J Psychiatr Res. 2002;36:179-18711886696
Google ScholarCrossref 99.Haanen HC, Hoenderdos HT, van Romunde LK.
et al. Controlled trial of hypnotherapy in the treatment of refractory fibromyalgia.
J Rheumatol. 1991;18:72-752023202
Google Scholar 100.Wik G, Fischer H, Bragee B, Finer B, Fredrikson M. Functional anatomy of hypnotic analgesia: a PET study of patients with
fibromyalgia.
Eur J Pain. 1999;3:7-1210700332
Google ScholarCrossref 101.Ferraccioli G, Ghirelli L, Scita F.
et al. EMG-biofeedback training in fibromyalgia syndrome.
J Rheumatol. 1987;14:820-8253478492
Google Scholar 102.Günther V, Mur E, Kinigadner U, Miller C. Fibromyalgia: the effect of relaxation and hydrogalvanic bath therapy
on the subjective pain experience.
Clin Rheumatol. 1994;13:573-5787697957
Google ScholarCrossref 103.Sarnoch H, Adler F, Scholz OB. Relevance of muscular sentivity, muscular activity, and cognitive variables
for pain reduction associated with EMG biofeedback in fibromyalgia.
Percept Mot Skills. 1997;84:1043-10509172222
Google ScholarCrossref 104.Berman BM, Ezzo J, Hadhazy V, Swyers JP. Is acupuncture effective in the treatment of fibromyalgia?
J Fam Pract. 1999;48:213-21810086765
Google Scholar 105.Deluze C, Bosia L, Zirbs A, Chantraine A, Vischer TL. Electroacupuncture in fibromyalgia: results of a controlled trial.
BMJ. 1992;305:1249-12521477566
Google ScholarCrossref 106.Harris RE, Tian X, Cupps TR.
et al. The treatment of fibromyalgia with acupuncture [abstract].
Arthritis Rheum. 2003;48:S692
Google Scholar 107.Blunt KL, Rajwani MH, Guerriero RC. The effectiveness of chiropractic management of fibromyalgia patients.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1997;20:389-3999272472
Google Scholar 108.Brattberg G. Connective tissue massage in the treatment of fibromyalgia.
Eur J Pain. 1999;3:235-24410700351
Google ScholarCrossref 109.Gambert RG, Shores JH, Russo DP.
et al. Osteopathic manipulative treatment in conjunction with medication relieves
pain associated with fibromyalgia syndrome.
J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2002;102:321-32512090649
Google Scholar 110.Almeida TF, Roizenblatt S, Benedito-Silva AA, Tufik S. The effect of combined therapy (ultrasound and interferential current)
on pain and sleep in fibromyalgia.
Pain. 2003;104:665-67212927639
Google ScholarCrossref 111.Buskila D, Abu-Shakra M, Neumann L.
et al. Balneotherapy for fibromyalgia at the Dead Sea.
Rheumatol Int. 2001;20:105-10811354556
Google ScholarCrossref 112.Sukenik S, Flusser D, Abu-Shakra M. The role of spa therapy in various rheumatic diseases.
Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 1999;25:883-89110573764
Google ScholarCrossref 113.Turk DC, Okifuji A, Sinclair JD, Starz TW. Pain, disability, and physical functioning in subgroups of patients
with fibromyalgia.
J Rheumatol. 1996;23:1255-12628823701
Google Scholar 114.Jensen MP, Nielson WR, Turner JA.
et al. Readiness to self-manage pain is associated with coping and with psychological
and physical functioning among patients with chronic pain.
Pain. 2003;104:529-53712927625
Google ScholarCrossref 115.Giesecke T, Williams DA, Harris RE.
et al. Subgrouping of fibromyalgia patients on the basis of pressure-pain
thresholds and psychological factors.
Arthritis Rheum. 2003;48:2916-292214558098
Google ScholarCrossref 116.Isomeri R, Mikkelsson M, Latikka P, Kammonen K. Effects of amitriptyline and cardiovascular fitness training on pain
in patients with primary fibromyalgia.
J Musculoskel Pain. 1993;1:253-260
Google ScholarCrossref 117.Guyatt G, Sackett D, Taylor DW.
et al. Determining optimal therapy: randomized trials in individual patients.
N Engl J Med. 1986;314:889-8922936958
Google ScholarCrossref 118.Jaeschke R, Adachi J, Guyatt G, Keller J, Wong B. Clinical usefulness of amitriptyline in fibromyalgia.
J Rheumatol. 1991;18:447-4511856813
Google Scholar