http://www.rtrs.org/assets/PTR_abstracts.pdf

Effectiveness of a combined pool-based exercise and education programme compared to usual medical
care in fibromyalgia syndrome: a randomised, controlled trial

J.G. McVeigh1, D.A. Hurley2, J.R. Basford3, J. Sim4, D. Baxter5 and M.B. Finch6
1Health and Rehabilitation Sciences Research Institute, University of Ulster, Belfast, UK
2School of Physiotherapy and Performance Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
3Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Minnesota, USA
4Primary Care Sciences Research Centre, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
5New Zealand Centre for Physiotherapy Research, University of Otago, Otago, New Zealand
6Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Royal Hospitals Trust, Belfast, UK

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a chronic muscular pain syndrome, whose optimal management remains problematic.1 The aim of this work was to determine the effectiveness of a
6-week combined pool-based exercise and education programme plus usual medical care versus usual medical care in the treatment of FMS.

Following ethical approval, a sample of convenience of 86 women (mean [SD] age 49.6 years [8.4]) with FMS were recruited. Participants were randomly allocated to ‘usual medical care’ (n = 44) or a 6-week pool-based exercise and education programme (n = 42). Outcome measures included: the
fibromyalgia impact questionnaire (FIQ), tender point count, total myalgic score, the euroqol health status
questionnaire, the McGill pain questionnaire, the arthritis impact measurement scales 2 (AIMS2), the self-efficacy for
managing chronic disease 6- item scale and the 6-min walk test. Participants were assessed at baseline and at approximately 8 weeks (52/86, 60%), 20 weeks (44/86, 51%). Data were collected by the same researcher at each time point. Attrition rates were similar for both groups. Between-group comparisons were performed with repeated measures analysis of covariance. Only a per protocol analysis is presented, protocol adherence for the intervention group (set at 50% of the intervention) was 71.4%.

Both groups were similar at baseline. At 8 weeks, mean (SD) FIQ scores were 76.0 (17.5) for the intervention group and 74.0 (20.3) for the usual care group. At 20 weeks, the
corresponding values were 73.8 (23.5) and 76.8 (20.9). Repeated measures ANCOVA found no significant difference between groups across these time points for any outcome measure.

On the basis of per protocol analyses conducted at 20-week follow-up, the addition of a brief pool-based exercise
and patient education programme to usual care does not offer superior benefit. The level of attrition in this
study, however, limits more definitive conclusion from the current results.

Acknowledgement
Financial support was from a Chartered Society of Physiotherapy Research Foundation Project Grant,
Fibromyalgia Support Group Northern Ireland.

Reference

1 Sim J, Adams N. Systematic review of randomised controlled trials of nonpharmacological interventions for fibromyalgia. Clin J Pain 2002;18:324-36