No Fibromyalgia Diagnosis Yet

[sunkacola]

@JayCS I am not arguing with you nor do I have any intention or desire to argue with you or anyone else over anything.
I will not make further comments on this topic.

 

[JayCS]

@JayCS I am not arguing with you nor do I have any intention or desire to argue with you or anyone else over anything.
I will not make further comments on this topic.

sunkacola, I know you are not "arguing" in the opposing sense, that's why I invite you to do so, with open hands ,
meaning to further the discussion, the reasoning. I didn't realize that you meant "arguing" in the sense of dispute and disagreement.
I meant it in the other sense, which in German is the only sense. So I'm sorry for this misunderstanding and hope to continue the discussion, because I for one still have a lot to learn from it, still haven't understood the criteria fully.

This topic of diagnosis may not be the most important, but it is asked frequently enough for it to be good to get our thoughts and understanding sorted out, especially as it is connected to the online test on our homepage, which is in accordance only with the 2016 criteria.

 

[JayCS]

The first UK fibromyalgia guidelines, 2022, on the rcplondon site, now actually state "FMS is not a diagnosis of exclusion" on p.23.

Although they say they are based on the 2016 modified criteria of the ACR, their worksheet and information sheets unfortunately blatantly omit the bit about further testing. So I fear that docs that don't read and digest the full guidelines won't do enough further testing. The guidelines are definitely worth a read. Also the information sheets, which are nicely concise, apart from that omission.

 

[fimi]

I'm going to read the guidlines now JayCS. If they are missing out important information about further testing, then in my opinion that's wrong. It's common sense to check for non-fibro conditions first surely? What if they have something more serious that's missed???

I will read with interest and bafflement I'm sure...!

 

[JayCS]

read the guidlines now JayCS. If they are missing out important information about further testing

Well, further testing's definitely got its full place in the long guidelines. The sense of the summaries is to cut it down to the core.
Omitting it in the 3 summaries to me means they assume docs know that and just want to get them diagnosing faster.
I don't know why they still have wasted space in the diagnostic worksheet of all places for outlines of people instead of adding that.
I think and hope they will change it in the next revision, as they know like we do that it is an ongoing process.
I've asked FMA UK about it, as they were involved by having a look over it. But they didn't reply in detail. I'll be bugging them.
What may have happened is that FMA UK saw it was in the guidelines and didn't concentrate on the sheets?
Reevaluating the information sheet for clinicians, that like the guidelines also says "FMS is not a diagnosis of exclusion; it can also coexist with other conditions" in the middle and counter-act that with "Symptoms cannot be explained by any other conditions".
Also "Use ACR (American College of Rheumatology) criteria to aid diagnosis" without saying which ones: 1990, 2010/11 or 2016...
And am I being over-critical if the patient information sheet seems very vague to me? Or is that the easy reading version, and they know people like us will read the other versions too, which are absolutely well readable I'd think, or is that me again?

 

[fimi]

No it's not you being over-critical JayCS...or if it is, then it's me as well!! As if fibro wasn't confusing enough...

I think and hope they will change it in the next revision, as they know like we do that it is an ongoing process.

Let's hope!