Cited by 102Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

The prognosis of functional limb weakness: a 14-year case-control study

Open access
Gelauff, Jeannette M, Carson, Alan, Ludwig, Lea, Tijssen, Marina A J, Stone, Jon·2019·Brain

Abstract

Reliable data on the prognosis of functional motor disorder are scarce, as existing studies of the prognosis of functional motor disorder are nearly all retrospective, small and uncontrolled. In this study we used a prospectively recruited, controlled cohort design to assess misdiagnosis, mortality and symptomatic and health outcome in patients with functional limb weakness compared to neurological disease and healthy control subjects. We also carried out an exploratory analysis for baseline factors predicting outcome. One hundred and seven patients with functional limb weakness, 46 neurological and 38 healthy control subjects from our previously studied prospective cohort were traced for follow-up after an average of 14 years. Misdiagnosis was determined in a consensus meeting using information from records, patients and their GPs. Numbers and causes of death were collected via death certificates. Outcome of limb weakness, physical and psychiatric symptoms, disability/quality of life and illness perception were recorded with self-rated questionnaires. Outcome measures were compared within and between groups. Seventy-six patients (71%) with functional limb weakness, 31 (67%) neurological and 23 (61%) healthy controls were included in follow-up. Misdiagnosis was found in one patient in the functional limb weakness group (1%) and in one neurological control (2%). Eleven patients with functional limb weakness, eight neurological control subjects and one healthy control subject had died. Weakness had completely remitted in 20% of patients in the functional limb weakness group and in 18% of the neurological controls (P = 0.785) and improved in a larger proportion of functional limb weakness patients (P = 0.011). Outcomes were comparable between patient groups, and worse than the healthy control group. No baseline factors were independent predictors of outcome, although somatization disorder, general health, pain and total symptoms at baseline were univariably correlated to outcome. This study is the largest and longest follow-up study of functional limb weakness. Misdiagnosis in functional limb weakness is rare after long-term follow-up. The disorder is associated with a higher mortality rate than expected, and symptoms are persistent and disabling. It appears difficult to predict outcome based on common baseline variables. These data should help inform clinicians to provide a more realistic outlook of the outcome and emphasize the importance of active and targeted therapy.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/brain/awz138

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gelauff, J. M., Carson, A., Ludwig, L., Tijssen, M. A. J., & Stone, J.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Gelauff, Jeannette M
Venue
Brain
Published
2019-06-05
Volume
142
Issue
7
Pages
2137-2148
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2948558558
Cited by
102
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 5
FWCI
9.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Brain (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
NHS Research Scotland Career Fellowship
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
prognosis, misdiagnosis, mortality, disability, quality of life, illness perception, somatization disorder, long-term follow-up, prognostic factors
MeSH terms
Cause of Death, Diagnostic Errors, Disability Evaluation, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nervous System Diseases, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, Quality of Life, Remission Induction, Time Factors, Case-Control Studies, Muscle Weakness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review