Learning Objective #1: Identify two theoretical fatigue frameworks

Learning Objective #2: Apply these theoretical frameworks to future clinical and outcomes research projects

---

Theoretical fatigue frameworks have been developed to guide research in fatigue. However, there is a significant gap between theory development and research utilization of fatigue frameworks in clinical and outcomes research. The purpose of this project was to assess two theoretical frameworks: The Integrated Fatigue Model (IFM) and the revised UCSF Symptom Management Model (UCSF-SMM) and to evaluate their potential to guide future research projects in fatigue. Both frameworks have been utilized in the past to guide fatigue studies and both have distinct differences. The IFM is a fatigue-specific comprehensive framework of 14 biological and psychosocial patterns including symptom or energy patterns that influence signs and symptoms of fatigue. They trigger six fatigue dimensions (sensory, temporary, behavioral, cognitive, affective, and emotional). These patterns can be interrelated to each other and can influence the dimensionality of fatigue. The UCSF-SMM is multi-dimensional symptom model, embedded within the three nursing domains: person, environment, and health and illness. The model places symptom perceptions, symptom management strategies, and outcomes within these nursing domains as the key components of a highly complex symptom management process. The IMF is an important development in the conceptualization of fatigue in cancer and in HIV/AIDS. It has wide applicability in clinical research questions that are focused on a particular outcome. Once a research project increases in complexity, researchers are challenged to find a context in which to place the planed future study. The UCSF-SMM offers a significantly advanced framework to take fatigue research to the next level of complexity. In order to base research activities into an appropriate theoretical framework it is crucial for the researcher to predetermine: a) the question b) the complexity c) the possibility for collaboration; and finally d) the financial resources; and determine which theoretical framework is most suitable for the project.