Assessing Functional Capacity in [ME/CFS]: A Patient Informed Questionnaire [FUNCAP], 2024, Sommerfelt et al

I have limited context, and I'm also aware of how challenging it can be to create a good questionnaire, however my thought on all of these questions, and probably some of the others as well,

  • Attend cinema or concert with high sound level or equivalent... (cut off on slide)

  • Participate in dinner party, party, or large family get-together

  • Do organised leisure activities

  • Concentrate for a full working day (office job)

is that it's not clear whether the person answering should factor in the potential travel to the location that these activities might happen at.
 
It looks like a useful questionnaire for the specific purpose it's designed for, which, as I understand it, is judging whether someone is fit to work.

As someone currently with physically severe and cognitively mild to moderate ME, I can't do anything on the list. Even when my ME was mild and I was able to work part time, with difficulty and lots of crashes, I would have done quite badly on the questionnaire, especially the physical aspects. Is there any indication at this stage of a cut off point in scoring this that would entitle someone to being declared unable to work and entitled to financial support?
 
A brief summary of the main points of the Norwegian presentation linked in the previous post.

The reason for creating the questionnaire is to give NAV (the Norwegian agency responsible for assessing eligibility for welfare payments) a better tool to assess pwME's level of function.

Existing tools were deemed unsuitable. For example, some primarily assess symptom load but what's needed here is assessment of function. Others don't cover relevant types of reduced function (e.g. problems being upright) and ask questions of the "Can you...?" type without taking into account subsequent PEM or the effect of cumulative exertion.

A new questionnaire was created and tested by about 500 pwME. Their feedback was incorporated into a second version. This was again tested by about 500 pwME and their feedback used to further refine the questionnaire. This third version was tested by 536 pwME plus 366 healthy people plus 109 people without ME but with other conditions affecting function. Further testing and refinements ongoing - so this is not the final version - but the analysis of the third version testing shows it's getting somewhere useful. The slide below is an excerpt only so not meant to cover everything, just to illustrate that this questionnaire clearly separates between the 3 groups, and just how low pwME rate their function.

Additionally they tried to see if the responses would allow separating pwME into degrees of severity of limitations. This worked quite well, too.

Also, the questionnaire is structured to capture different domains of function separately and that turned out to be important because it allows it to capture that some people were extremely limited cognitively but less so physically whereas others were the other way around or were most limited by sensory overload or by OI.

Translation of the slide demonstrating separation between 3 groups is below the slide.
View attachment 18633

Questions asked are what happens if people attempt the following
  • Prepare a 'complicated' meal from scratch (more than... cut off on slide)
  • Go for a longer walk, above 1km, mostly flat
  • Concentrate on a task for at least 2 hours
  • Heavier activity e.g. wash floor/vacuum at least 1/2 (hour? cut off on slide)
  • Attend cinema or concert with high sound level or equivalent... (cut off on slide)
  • Go for a longer walk, more than 1km, hilly or rugged terrain
  • Participate in dinner party, party, or large family get-together
  • Physical activity with high pulse rate 15min
  • Do organised leisure activities
  • Train at high pulse rate approx 1/2 hour
  • Concentrate for a full working day (office job)
Scoring system is as follows
  • 0 can't do this
  • 1 I experience serious deterioration
  • 2 I can't do anything else that day and the following day(s)
  • 3 I can't do anything else that day
  • 4 have to reduce other activity the same day
  • 5 occasionally affects other activity
  • 6 unproblematic, doesn't affect other activity
Grey: pwME
Orange: pw other function-limiting conditions
Blue: healthy
Hey this is pretty close to the questionnaire I had in mind. Just take regular activities of daily living, ranked by order of exertion, and grade them according to how sustainable they are. Some similar ideas to some questionnaire that was discussed a while ago, Pittsburgh something, but better.

This looks smart. That's a nice change from the usual. There's work to do on proper gradation of limitations as they relate to the level of exertion, for the questions to be truly representative, but the idea seems right to me.
 
Professor Kristian Sommerfelt talks about the questionnaire's development at the IIMEC15 Conference

Very thorough process by the look of it. Basically finished now and ready to go. Hasn't been published yet but will be, and the questionnaire developers are open to other researchers using the questionnaire now, as it is (English version has been created)

Seemed well received by the audience so hopefully it will be taken up widely

One minor criticism: the acronym FUNCAP grates. Stands for Functional Capacity, I think, so how about adding another C to make it FUNC-CAP?

Brief discussion during the Q&A about the (in)appropriateness of the term 'mild', suggested alternative: Grade-1-ME, Grade-2-ME, etc

 
Brief discussion during the Q&A about the (in)appropriateness of the term 'mild', suggested alternative: Grade-1-ME, Grade-2-ME, etc
I saw this today:
(United Kingdom) Profiling the response to exercise in Long COVID patients to inform novel rehabilitation guidelines, recruiting, Faghy and Bewick
Patient Information Sheet
https://www.shu.ac.uk/advanced-well...nts-to-inform-novel-rehabilitation-guidelines
Identified as still having symptoms of Long-COVID as identified as a grade 2, 3 or 4 using the post-COVID functional status scale. This will be done with you over the telephone.
It probably is better than having a scale with "mild".
 
This is really good. Dr. Sommerfelt strikes me as a scientist who values meaningfully involving patients to gather their experiences, and understands and applies how they explain the illness--that PEM causes a reduction in function for several days.
 
It looks like a useful questionnaire for the specific purpose it's designed for, which, as I understand it, is judging whether someone is fit to work.

As someone currently with physically severe and cognitively mild to moderate ME, I can't do anything on the list. Even when my ME was mild and I was able to work part time, with difficulty and lots of crashes, I would have done quite badly on the questionnaire, especially the physical aspects. Is there any indication at this stage of a cut off point in scoring this that would entitle someone to being declared unable to work and entitled to financial support?
No, we are not setting a cut-off score for being able to work etc.
The questionnaire looks at various domains, and having a low score in certain domains, like "being upright" og "sensitivity to light and sound" may be extremely diableing, even if you score higher in other domains. For most patients there is a large degree of corrolation, but there is also some who score very low in some domains, and higher in others. So totaling up the score would be misleading.
 
Start of merged preprint thread

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis / Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) is an acquired disease with significant morbidity that affects both children and adults. Effective tools to assess functional capacity (FC) are severely lacking which has significant consequences for timely diagnosis, assessments for patient disability benefits and assessing the impact and effectiveness of interventions. In interventional research the inability to assess FC can result in an incomplete assessment of the potential effect of the intervention. Specifically of concern is that if an intervention is effective in reducing symptom load, patients may increase their activity level to reach a pre-intervention symptom load. Thus, if FC is not accurately assessed, beneficial treatment outcomes may be missed.

To address this issue, using extensive, repeated patient feedback we have developed a new questionnaire, FUNCAP, to achieve optimal FC assessment in ME/CFS patients. The questionnaire covers eight domains and activity types: A. Personal hygiene / basic functions, B. Walking / movement, C. Being upright, D. Activities in the home, E. Communication, F. Activities outside the home, G. Reactions to light and sound, and H. Concentration. Through five rounds of anonymous web-based surveys and a further test - retest validation round, two versions of the questionnaire were developed; a longer version comprising 55 questions (FUNCAP55) to improve diagnostic and disability benefit/ insurance FC assessments and a shorter version (FUNCAP27) for interventional research and less extensive FC assessments. FUNCAP may also be useful in other conditions where fatigue and PEM is present, such as Long Covid.

https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202309.2091/v1
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Looks very useful to me.

The supplementary material includes the full questionnaire. It consists 55 concrete questions about activities where you can give 7 different scores, depending on how impactful it would be for you (thus including PEM).
upload_2023-9-29_19-38-3.png

It always frustrates me that many functional assessments expect a yes or no answer: can you do this activity or not? If you have ME/CFS the answer is often yes but then my capacity is reduced the next days and I have to limit other activities, etc.

The authors make a good point here, which is often overlooked:

"Specifically of concern is that if an intervention is effective in reducing symptom load, patients may increase their activity level to reach a pre-intervention symptom load."
Hope that other research groups will try to test and use this questionnaire.
 
i cannot follow forum or threads adequately but:

The supplementary material includes the full questionnaire. It consists 55 concrete questions about activities where you can give 7 different scores, depending on how impactful it would be for you (thus including PEM).
View attachment 20456

is this adequately aware of disease progression? and adequately aware of levels of severity?

unless i am missing something, which is likely given that i only saw this post, this is unsuitable.


for context, on teh scale that has moderate = housebound [leave house once every 6 months or so] and severe = bedridden [vertical for bathroom], i am relatively recently at very severe. my doctor diagnosed me as such. i a very close to extremely severe.


each new severity level is a qualitatively different disease in a sense. it is not "more of the same just worse". it is like normals thinking m.e. = marathon run pleasant fatigue.


[digression but for example, for most of my life i have had delayed/reversed phase circadian sleep. doing what my body wanted was best for my body; fighting it to meet society's whims and desires and norms and manufactured needs was wrong. but recently, it feels to me like the body must have many diurnal / circadian rhythms [cell waste, consolidating memories, immune resetting, who knows], and now, more of them are out of sync. the result of that, it feels like, is that fighting the reversed phase is better for me because sleep before dawn is highly significant for health/pem although extremely difficult to achieve.]


i must be missing something because here is my case: if i have to exert or get hit with intolerances [e.g. standing up for a few seconds, talking, eating, lifting arms, mold, noise: any impact on system], i can experience worsening.

that worsening can be, for example, a very severe worsening of oi or cognition or stamina. it can vary and it is not always predictable.

if i am lucky, the worsening from that one exposure/exertion/intolerance exists only at that time, or only for hte next few days, as referred to in the picture in the post i am replying to. [also, incidentally, the worsening can be one of hte answers or more than one simultaneously. not mutually exclusive.] but it can also be permanent. i.e. never recover to any given point after it.

this has occurred many times. this seems a likely component of my progressive course. i do not know what the other components are. in principle maybe much of deterioration is due to the accumulation of pem-causing events.

significantly, if i get good restorative sleep, perhaps needing also on nights /after/ the night of the exposure, which might require high levels of medicines due to very screwed up sleep and diurnal / circadian cycles, i /might/ get back toward, or even back to, the pre-exposure status.

[it is possible that e.g. next-day worsening is to some degree a consequence of sleep on exposure night being screwed up.]

restorative sleep is for me /healing/. [it is not a brief respite, except in that further pem later makes me worse.] in principle, if no further pem [not in practice given env, internal body functions, etc.] then that restorative sleep could keep me at its level for long periods.


btw, there are more things than functioning that matter or for deciding whether treatment works etc. i hope the authors ack that.


in the above, i brought up several things that seem inconsistent with the question format matching things like a case like mine, or progressive course, higher severity levels than very mild, the role of restorative sleep, permanent worsening, and more.

to me, those are /essential/ attributes of the disease for at least some pwme. it doesn't even mention being knocked out for weeks. that is what francis collins was so expressively amazed by in an interview with charlie rose. perhaps collins couludn't imagine worse than weeks.

due to the exponentially-worse levels thing or the match/nuke thing, or othr resasons, it is infamously difficult for even pwme to accurately imagine worse severity than their own, or one's patients if one is a doctor. i'd like pwme and biomedicine to get past that. oh, and society.

the above seems related to the "the order of magnitude is off" problem which i have a thread on someplace with i think those words in the title.

the above also implies my intolerances conception of pem [viz. pem/pene is not only caused by cognitive, physical, or emotional exertion, and not only exertion as normally defined, but also oi, mold, and ANY impact to the system].

also, maybe most pwme recvover by time alone. but even if so, i am not sure that that is always the case. it could be e.g. in large part sleep + lack of further pem. [incidentally, i want a positive english word for lack of iimpact tot he system. like peace is sorta lack of war or noise.]


[as an aside, i usually cannot view any white-background pictures; text transcriptions/ocr of them would be useful to me as a forum member. they would also allow search. otoh it might be hard to transcribe.]


ETA: maybe francis collins was amazed by the duration of hte disease being weeks rather than by pem being weeks. either way.
 
Last edited:
@Samuel, I understand your point that this is not a suitable questionnaire for people whose ME/CFS is very or extremely severe for distinguising whether someone at that level of severity is deteriorating, since the answers are likely to be that someone in that position can't do anything on the list, so getting worse won't show up. I think in that situation a different form of assessment would be needed that looks at things like specialist care needs.

However, for its stated purposes of assessing fitness to work and assessing whether functional capacity is improving or getting worse for the purposes of diagnosis, medical records and treatment research it looks very useful to me.
 
I like that they consulted patients so much. I think I will submit this form when next being assessed for social welfare. It's a pretty quick way of conveying inability to work at all.

One of the things I would change is the gulf between 0 (I cannot do this) and 1 (I feel pants for at least 3 days if I do this). Some activities set me back for weeks/months/years, and have to be done eg some medical appointments.

Am not sure about the concentration section. I think it could make it look like a person could potentially do office-type work from home when they might not be able to do that at all. Part-time work would require a LOT more ability than being able to read a text, read an A4 page, do a simple sum in your head or write a text message. When my ability to do part-time work fizzled out, I was still able to do 46-54. Would I have been able to work from home? No.

H Concentration
46 Reading a short text, such as a mobile phone text message
47 Reading fiction/light reading
48 Reading and understanding a non-fiction text, such as an official document one A4 page long
49 Performing simple mental arithmetic
50 Writing short messages on a smartphone or tablet
51 Using social media to stay in touch with others
52 Watching TV (series, news)
53 Focusing on a task for approx. 10 minutes continuously
54 Focusing on a task for approx. 2 hours continuously
55 Managing a full working day (non-physical work such as office work, classes or lectures)

Ability to write or produce written documents (usually having assimilated plenty of other verbal and written info) is missing from the communication and concentration sections, but is a key part of many jobs.
 
In terms of the levels would you have said doing 46-54 were at level 5 this rarely affects other activities or 6 unproblematic.? If for example concentrating on something for 2 hours continuously scored at 4 I would have to limit other activities on the same day or 3 I can do little else on the same day then part time work capacity would be restricted.
 
The authors of this paper and the patients who helped them have done superb work. I have several points of strong praise:
  • The entire questionnaire is based around PEM, which acknowledges the most specific and disabling symptom of ME
  • Unlike most questionnaires, the activities given are highly specific, often stating lengths of time to give you a precise idea
  • The questionnaire distinguishes clearly between different severity levels (see figure 1 on page 9/PDF page 10)
  • Scores change smoothly from very severe to healthy. The range of activities presented is wide enough that people don't bottom or top out.
They don't ask about how much trouble you have doing things because of symptoms you had before you attempted an activity, like poor concentration or fatigue. However, existing questionnaires already capture that.

I hope that in a few years this will be a standard tool for evaluating PEM.
 
Back
Top Bottom