4.7 Article

Predictors of chronic fatigue in adolescents six months after acute Epstein-Barr virus infection: A prospective cohort study

Journal

BRAIN BEHAVIOR AND IMMUNITY
Volume 75, Issue -, Pages 94-100

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbi.2018.09.023

Keywords

Chronic fatigue; Epstein-Barr virus infection; Infectious mononucleosis; Adolescents; Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Acute Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection is a trigger of chronic fatigue and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). This study investigated baseline predictors of chronic fatigue six months after an acute EBV infection. Materials and methods: A total of 200 adolescents (12-20 years old) with acute EBV infection were assessed for 149 possible baseline predictors and followed prospectively. We performed linear regression to assess possible associations between baseline predictors and fatigue (Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire total score) six months after the acute EBV infection. A total of 70 healthy controls were included for cross-sectional reference. This study is part of the CEBA-project (Chronic fatigue following acute Epstein-Barr virus infection in adolescents). Results: In the final multiple linear regression model, fatigue six months after acute EBV infection was significantly and independently predicted by the following baseline variables (regression coefficient B[95% CI]): Sensory sensitivity (0.8[0.09-1.6]), pain severity (0.2[0.02-0.3]), functional impairment (1000 steps/day) (0.3[-0.5 to - 0.081), negative emotions (anxiety) (0.4[0.2-0.6]), verbal memory (correct word recognition) (1.7[0.1-3.3]), plasma C-reactive protein (2.8[1.1-4.4] for CRP values > 0.86) and plasma Vitamin 812 (-0.005[-0.01 to 0.001]). Conclusions: Development of fatigue after acute EBV infection is to a larger extent predicted by baseline variables related to symptoms and functions than to baseline variables reflecting infectious and immune processes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available