4.5 Article

The diagnosis of fibromyalgia syndrome

期刊

CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 22, 期 6, 页码 570-574

出版社

ROY COLL PHYS LONDON EDITORIAL OFFICE
DOI: 10.7861/clinmed.2022-0402

关键词

fibromyalgia syndrome; FMS; clinical guidelines; nociplastic pain; chronic pain

资金

  1. UK clinical guidelines.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a common primary pain condition that affects the entire body, characterized by challenges in diagnosis due to lack of specific clinical laboratory investigations. Recent research has shown important evidence of changes in the central and peripheral nervous system functions, as well as immunological activity. The complexity of the condition, with fluctuating and multiple symptoms, makes it difficult for patients to articulate their symptoms and for healthcare professionals to fully understand the disease. The Royal College of Physicians' guidance aims to provide concise and relevant information to support clinicians in diagnosing FMS.
Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a common widespread primary pain condition, with a worldwide prevalence of 296-496. Recent research has revealed important evidence for changes in central and peripheral nervous system functions and immunological activity. The diagnosis of FMS can be challenging with no known clinical laboratory investigations to confirm or refute its presence. Symptoms are commonly multiple, fluctuant and may not easily align with established medical diagnostic categories. It can be difficult for patients to articulate their array of symptoms, and for both patients and healthcare professionals to fully make sense of the complexities of the condition. As such, patients may be diagnosed inaccurately with alternative conditions, delaying diagnosis by years. The recent publication of the Royal College of Physicians' guidance aims to support clinicians in the diagnosis of FMS. Its purpose is to provide succinct, relevant information for patients and clinicians about FMS and its diagnosis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据