scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Winfried Häuser

Other affiliations: University of Duisburg-Essen
Bio: Winfried Häuser is an academic researcher from Technische Universität München. The author has contributed to research in topics: Fibromyalgia & Chronic pain. The author has an hindex of 61, co-authored 361 publications receiving 15838 citations. Previous affiliations of Winfried Häuser include University of Duisburg-Essen.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A fibromyalgia survey questionnaire is developed using a modification of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia (ACR 2010) to allow their use in epidemiologic and clinical studies without the requirement for an examiner.
Abstract: Objective. To develop a fibromyalgia (FM) survey questionnaire for epidemiologic and clinical studies using a modification of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia (ACR 2010). We also created a new FM symptom scale to further characterize FM severity. Methods. The ACR 2010 consists of 2 scales, the Widespread Pain Index (WPI) and the Symptom Severity (SS) scale. We modified these ACR 2010 criteria by eliminating the physician’s estimate of the extent of somatic symptoms and substituting the sum of 3 specific self-reported symptoms. We also created a 0–31 FM Symptom scale (FS) by adding the WPI to the modified SS scale. We administered the questionnaire to 729 patients previously diagnosed with FM, 845 with osteoarthritis (OA) or with other noninflammatory rheumatic conditions, 439 with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and 5210 with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Results. The modified ACR 2010 criteria were satisfied by 60% with a prior diagnosis of FM, 21.1% with RA, 16.8% with OA, and 36.7% with SLE. The criteria properly identified diagnostic groups based on FM severity variables. An FS score ≥ 13 best separated criteria+ and criteria− patients, classifying 93.0% correctly, with a sensitivity of 96.6% and a specificity of 91.8% in the study population. Conclusion. A modification to the ACR 2010 criteria will allow their use in epidemiologic and clinical studies without the requirement for an examiner. The criteria are simple to use and administer, but they are not to be used for self-diagnosis. The FS may have wide utility beyond the bounds of FM, including substitution for widespread pain in epidemiological studies.

1,195 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A (2016) revision to the 2010/2011 fibromyalgia criteria combines physician and questionnaire criteria, minimizes misclassification of regional pain disorders, and eliminates the previously confusing recommendation regarding diagnostic exclusions.

997 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: These recommendations are underpinned by high-quality reviews and meta-analyses and propose research priorities clarifying who will benefit from specific interventions, their effect in combination and organisation of healthcare systems to optimise outcome.
Abstract: Objective The original European League Against Rheumatism recommendations for managing fibromyalgia assessed evidence up to 2005. The paucity of studies meant that most recommendations were ‘expert opinion’. Methods A multidisciplinary group from 12 countries assessed evidence with a focus on systematic reviews and meta-analyses concerned with pharmacological/non-pharmacological management for fibromyalgia. A review, in May 2015, identified eligible publications and key outcomes assessed were pain, fatigue, sleep and daily functioning. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system was used for making recommendations. Results 2979 titles were identified: from these 275 full papers were selected for review and 107 reviews (and/or meta-analyses) evaluated as eligible. Based on meta-analyses, the only ‘strong for’ therapy-based recommendation in the guidelines was exercise. Based on expert opinion, a graduated approach, the following four main stages are suggested underpinned by shared decision-making with patients. Initial management should involve patient education and focus on non-pharmacological therapies. In case of non-response, further therapies (all of which were evaluated as ‘weak for’ based on meta-analyses) should be tailored to the specific needs of the individual and may involve psychological therapies (for mood disorders and unhelpful coping strategies), pharmacotherapy (for severe pain or sleep disturbance) and/or a multimodal rehabilitation programme (for severe disability). Conclusions These recommendations are underpinned by high-quality reviews and meta-analyses. The size of effect for most treatments is relatively modest. We propose research priorities clarifying who will benefit from specific interventions, their effect in combination and organisation of healthcare systems to optimise outcome.

773 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Pouchitis is a non-specific inflammation of the ileal reservoir and the most common complication of IPAA in patients with UC, and may be caused by conditions other than pouchitis, including Crohn's disease of the pouch and an irritable pouch.
Abstract: ### 8.1 General Proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the procedure of choice for most patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) requiring colectomy.1 Pouchitis is a non-specific inflammation of the ileal reservoir and the most common complication of IPAA in patients with UC.2–7 Its frequency is related to the duration of follow up, occurring in up to 50% of patients 10 years after IPAA in large series from major referral centres.1–9 The cumulative incidence of pouchitis in patients with an IPAA for familial adenomatous polyposis is much lower, ranging from 0 to 10%.10–12 Reasons for the higher frequency of pouchitis in UC remain unknown. Whether pouchitis more commonly develops within the first years after IPAA or whether the risk continues to increase with longer follow up remains undefined. ### Statement 8A The diagnosis of pouchitis requires the presence of symptoms, together with characteristic endoscopic and histological abnormalities [EL3a, RG B]. Extensive UC, extraintestinal manifestations (i.e. PSC), being a non-smoker, p-ANCA positive serology and NSAID use are possible risk factors for pouchitis [EL3b, RG D] #### 8.1.1 Symptoms After proctocolectomy with IPAA, median stool frequency is 4 to 8 bowel movements,1–4,13,14 with about 700 mL of semiformed/liquid stool per day,2,13,14 compared to a volume of 200 mL/day in healthy people. Symptoms related to pouchitis include increased stool frequency and liquidity, abdominal cramping, urgency, tenesmus and pelvic discomfort.2,15 Rectal bleeding, fever, or extraintestinal manifestations may occur. Rectal bleeding is more often related to inflammation of the rectal cuff (“cuffitis,” Section 1.4),16 than to pouchitis. Faecal incontinence may occur in the absence of pouchitis after IPAA, but is more common in patients with pouchitis. Symptoms of pouch dysfunction in patients with IPAA may be caused by conditions other than pouchitis, including Crohn's disease of the pouch,17–19 cuffitis16 and an irritable pouch …

432 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: To evaluate fibromyalgia in the general population with emphasis on prevalence, dimensionality, and somatic symptom severity.
Abstract: Objective To evaluate fibromyalgia in the general population with emphasis on prevalence, dimensionality, and somatic symptom severity. Methods We studied 2,445 subjects randomly selected from the German general population in 2012 using the American College of Rheumatology 2010 preliminary diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia, as modified for survey research, and the polysymptomatic distress scale (PSD). Anxiety, depression, and somatic symptom severity were assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) series, and measures of symptoms and quality of life were assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer questionnaire. Results The prevalence of fibromyalgia was 2.1% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.6, 2.7), with 2.4% (95% CI 1.5, 3.2) in women and 1.8% (95% CI 1.1, 2.6) in men, but the difference was not statistically significant. Prevalence rose with age. Fibromyalgia subjects had markedly abnormal scores for all covariates. We found smooth, nondisordered relationships between PSD and all predictors, providing additional evidence against the hypothesis that fibromyalgia is a discrete disorder and in support of a dimensional or spectrum disorder. There was a strong correlation (r = 0.790) between the PSD and the PHQ somatic symptom severity scale; 38.5% of persons with fibromyalgia satisfied the proposed Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition criteria for a physical symptom disorder. Conclusion The modified 2010 diagnostic criteria do not result in high levels of fibromyalgia. PSD and fibromyalgia are strongly related to somatic symptom severity. There is evidence in support of fibromyalgia as a dimensional or continuum disorder. This has important ramifications for neurobiologic and epidemiology research, and for clinical diagnosis, treatment, and ascertainment of disability.

381 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo-controlled studies examined the efficacy and tolerability of different types of antidepressants, the combination of an antidepressant and an antipsychotic, antipsychotics alone, or natural products in adults with somatoform disorders in adults to improve optimal treatment decisions.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Somatoform disorders are characterised by chronic, medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS). Although different medications are part of treatment routines for people with somatoform disorders in clinics and private practices, there exists no systematic review or meta-analysis on the efficacy and tolerability of these medications. We aimed to synthesise to improve optimal treatment decisions.OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of pharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders (specifically somatisation disorder, undifferentiated somatoform disorder, somatoform autonomic dysfunction, and pain disorder) in adults.SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR) (to 17 January 2014). This register includes relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from The Cochrane Library (all years), MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date), and PsycINFO (1967 to date). To identify ongoing trials, we searched ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials metaRegister, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry. For grey literature, we searched ProQuest Dissertation {\&} Theses Database, OpenGrey, and BIOSIS Previews. We handsearched conference proceedings and reference lists of potentially relevant papers and systematic reviews and contacted experts in the field.SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected RCTs or cluster RCTs of pharmacological interventions versus placebo, treatment as usual, another medication, or a combination of different medications for somatoform disorders in adults. We included people fulfilling standardised diagnostic criteria for somatisation disorder, undifferentiated somatoform disorder, somatoform autonomic dysfunction, or somatoform pain disorder.DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One review author and one research assistant independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Primary outcomes included the severity of MUPS on a continuous measure, and acceptability of treatment.MAIN RESULTS: We included 26 RCTs (33 reports), with 2159 participants, in the review. They examined the efficacy of different types of antidepressants, the combination of an antidepressant and an antipsychotic, antipsychotics alone, or natural products (NPs). The duration of the studies ranged between two and 12 weeks.One meta-analysis of placebo-controlled studies showed no clear evidence of a significant difference between tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and placebo for the outcome severity of MUPS (SMD -0.13; 95{\%} CI -0.39 to 0.13; 2 studies, 239 participants; I(2) = 2{\%}; low-quality evidence). For new-generation antidepressants (NGAs), there was very low-quality evidence showing they were effective in reducing the severity of MUPS (SMD -0.91; 95{\%} CI -1.36 to -0.46; 3 studies, 243 participants; I(2) = 63{\%}). For NPs there was low-quality evidence that they were effective in reducing the severity of MUPS (SMD -0.74; 95{\%} CI -0.97 to -0.51; 2 studies, 322 participants; I(2) = 0{\%}).One meta-analysis showed no clear evidence of a difference between TCAs and NGAs for severity of MUPS (SMD -0.16; 95{\%} CI -0.55 to 0.23; 3 studies, 177 participants; I(2) = 42{\%}; low-quality evidence). There was also no difference between NGAs and other NGAs for severity of MUPS (SMD -0.16; 95{\%} CI -0.45 to 0.14; 4 studies, 182 participants; I(2) = 0{\%}).Finally, one meta-analysis comparing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) with a combination of SSRIs and antipsychotics showed low-quality evidence in favour of combined treatment for severity of MUPS (SMD 0.77; 95{\%} CI 0.32 to 1.22; 2 studies, 107 participants; I(2) = 23{\%}).Differences regarding the acceptability of the treatment (rate of all-cause drop-outs) were neither found between NGAs and placebo (RR 1.01, 95{\%} CI 0.64 to 1.61; 2 studies, 163 participants; I(2) = 0{\%}; low-quality evidence) or NPs and placebo (RR 0.85, 95{\%} CI 0.40 to 1.78; 3 studies, 506 participants; I(2) = 0{\%}; low-quality evidence); nor between TCAs and other medication (RR 1.48, 95{\%} CI 0.59 to 3.72; 8 studies, 556 participants; I(2) =14{\%}; low-quality evidence); nor between antidepressants and the combination of an antidepressant and an antipsychotic (RR 0.80, 95{\%} CI 0.25 to 2.52; 2 studies, 118 participants; I(2) = 0{\%}; low-quality evidence). Percental attrition rates due to adverse effects were high in all antidepressant treatments (0{\%} to 32{\%}), but low for NPs (0{\%} to 1.7{\%}).The risk of bias was high in many domains across studies. Seventeen trials (65.4{\%}) gave no information about random sequence generation and only two (7.7{\%}) provided information about allocation concealment. Eighteen studies (69.2{\%}) revealed a high or unclear risk in blinding participants and study personnel; 23 studies had high risk of bias relating to blinding assessors. For the comparison NGA versus placebo, there was relatively high imprecision and heterogeneity due to one outlier study. Although we identified 26 studies, each comparison only contained a few studies and small numbers of participants so the results were imprecise.AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current review found very low-quality evidence for NGAs and low-quality evidence for NPs being effective in treating somatoform symptoms in adults when compared with placebo. There was some evidence that different classes of antidepressants did not differ in efficacy; however, this was limited and of low to very low quality. These results had serious shortcomings such as the high risk of bias, strong heterogeneity in the data, and small sample sizes. Furthermore, the significant effects of antidepressant treatment have to be balanced against the relatively high rates of adverse effects. Adverse effects produced by medication can have amplifying effects on symptom perceptions, particularly in people focusing on somatic symptoms without medical causes. We can only draw conclusions about short-term efficacy of the pharmacological interventions because no trial included follow-up assessments. For each of the comparisons where there were available data on acceptability rates (NGAs versus placebo, NPs versus placebo, TCAs versus other medication, and antidepressants versus a combination of an antidepressant and an antipsychotic), no clear differences between the intervention and comparator were found.Future high-quality research should be carried out to determine the effectiveness of medications other than antidepressants, to compare antidepressants more thoroughly, and to follow-up participants over longer periods (the longest follow up was just 12 weeks). Another idea for future research would be to include other outcomes such as functional impairment or dysfunctional behaviours and cognitions as well as the classical outcomes such as symptom severity, depression, or anxiety.

11,458 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
19 Apr 2016-JAMA
TL;DR: This guideline is intended to improve communication about benefits and risks of opioids for chronic pain, improve safety and effectiveness of pain treatment, and reduce risks associated with long-term opioid therapy.
Abstract: Importance Primary care clinicians find managing chronic pain challenging. Evidence of long-term efficacy of opioids for chronic pain is limited. Opioid use is associated with serious risks, including opioid use disorder and overdose. Objective To provide recommendations about opioid prescribing for primary care clinicians treating adult patients with chronic pain outside of active cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life care. Process The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated a 2014 systematic review on effectiveness and risks of opioids and conducted a supplemental review on benefits and harms, values and preferences, and costs. CDC used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to assess evidence type and determine the recommendation category. Evidence Synthesis Evidence consisted of observational studies or randomized clinical trials with notable limitations, characterized as low quality using GRADE methodology. Meta-analysis was not attempted due to the limited number of studies, variability in study designs and clinical heterogeneity, and methodological shortcomings of studies. No study evaluated long-term (≥1 year) benefit of opioids for chronic pain. Opioids were associated with increased risks, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death, with dose-dependent effects. Recommendations There are 12 recommendations. Of primary importance, nonopioid therapy is preferred for treatment of chronic pain. Opioids should be used only when benefits for pain and function are expected to outweigh risks. Before starting opioids, clinicians should establish treatment goals with patients and consider how opioids will be discontinued if benefits do not outweigh risks. When opioids are used, clinicians should prescribe the lowest effective dosage, carefully reassess benefits and risks when considering increasing dosage to 50 morphine milligram equivalents or more per day, and avoid concurrent opioids and benzodiazepines whenever possible. Clinicians should evaluate benefits and harms of continued opioid therapy with patients every 3 months or more frequently and review prescription drug monitoring program data, when available, for high-risk combinations or dosages. For patients with opioid use disorder, clinicians should offer or arrange evidence-based treatment, such as medication-assisted treatment with buprenorphine or methadone. Conclusions and Relevance The guideline is intended to improve communication about benefits and risks of opioids for chronic pain, improve safety and effectiveness of pain treatment, and reduce risks associated with long-term opioid therapy.

3,935 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
10 Feb 2011-BMJ
TL;DR: Summary estimates of treatment effect from random effects meta-analysis give only the average effect across all studies, but inclusion of prediction intervals, which estimate the likely effect in an individual setting, could make it easier to apply the results to clinical practice.
Abstract: Summary estimates of treatment effect from random effects meta-analysis give only the average effect across all studies. Inclusion of prediction intervals, which estimate the likely effect in an individual setting, could make it easier to apply the results to clinical practice

1,855 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Clinicians should be aware that meditation programs can result in small to moderate reductions of multiple negative dimensions of psychological stress and should be prepared to talk with their patients about the role that a meditation program could have in addressing psychological stress.
Abstract: Importance Many people meditate to reduce psychological stress and stress-related health problems. To counsel people appropriately, clinicians need to know what the evidence says about the health benefits of meditation. Objective To determine the efficacy of meditation programs in improving stress-related outcomes (anxiety, depression, stress/distress, positive mood, mental health–related quality of life, attention, substance use, eating habits, sleep, pain, and weight) in diverse adult clinical populations. Evidence Review We identified randomized clinical trials with active controls for placebo effects through November 2012 from MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, PsycArticles, Scopus, CINAHL, AMED, the Cochrane Library, and hand searches. Two independent reviewers screened citations and extracted data. We graded the strength of evidence using 4 domains (risk of bias, precision, directness, and consistency) and determined the magnitude and direction of effect by calculating the relative difference between groups in change from baseline. When possible, we conducted meta-analyses using standardized mean differences to obtain aggregate estimates of effect size with 95% confidence intervals. Findings After reviewing 18 753 citations, we included 47 trials with 3515 participants. Mindfulness meditation programs had moderate evidence of improved anxiety (effect size, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.12-0.64] at 8 weeks and 0.22 [0.02-0.43] at 3-6 months), depression (0.30 [0.00-0.59] at 8 weeks and 0.23 [0.05-0.42] at 3-6 months), and pain (0.33 [0.03- 0.62]) and low evidence of improved stress/distress and mental health–related quality of life. We found low evidence of no effect or insufficient evidence of any effect of meditation programs on positive mood, attention, substance use, eating habits, sleep, and weight. We found no evidence that meditation programs were better than any active treatment (ie, drugs, exercise, and other behavioral therapies). Conclusions and Relevance Clinicians should be aware that meditation programs can result in small to moderate reductions of multiple negative dimensions of psychological stress. Thus, clinicians should be prepared to talk with their patients about the role that a meditation program could have in addressing psychological stress. Stronger study designs are needed to determine the effects of meditation programs in improving the positive dimensions of mental health and stress-related behavior.

1,625 citations