The comorbidity of DSM-III-R personality disorders in somatization disorder

Hypothyroidism and Somatization: Results from E-Mode Patient Self-Assessment of Thyroid Therapy, a Cross-Sectional, International Online Patient Survey

Background: Between 10% and 15% of hypothyroid patients experience persistent symptoms despite achieving biochemical euthyroidism. Unexplained persistent symptoms can be a sign of somatization. This is associated with distress and high health care resource use and can be classified as somatic symptom disorder (SSD). Prevalence rates for SSD differ depending on classification criteria and how they are ascertained, varying between 4% and 25%. As this has not been studied in hypothyroid patients before, the aim of this study was to document somatization in people with hypothyroidism and to explore associations with other patient characteristics and outcomes. Methods: Online, multinational cross-sectional survey of individuals with self-reported, treated hypothyroidism, which included the validated Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15) for assessment of somatization. Chi-squared tests with the Bonferroni correction were used to explore outcomes for respondents with a PHQ-15 score ≥10 (probable somatic symptom disorder [pSSD]) versus a PHQ-15 score <10 (absence of SSD). Results: A total of 3915 responses were received, 3516 of which contained the valid PHQ-15 data (89.8%). The median score was 11.3 (range 0-30 [confidence interval 10.9-11.3]). The prevalence of pSSD was 58.6%. Associations were found between pSSD and young age (p < 0.001), women (p < 0.001), not working (p < 0.001), having below average household income (p < 0.001), being treated with levothyroxine (LT4) (rather than combination of LT4 and L-triiodothyronine [LT3], LT3 alone, or desiccated thyroid extract) (p < 0.001), expression of the view that the thyroid medication taken did not control the symptoms of hypothyroidism well (p < 0.001), and with number of comorbidities (p < 0.001). pSSD was associated with respondent attribution of most PHQ-15 symptoms to the hypothyroidism or its treatment (p < 0.001), dissatisfaction with care and treatment of hypothyroidism (p < 0.001), a negative impact of hypothyroidism on daily living (p < 0.001), and with anxiety and low mood/depression (p < 0.001). Conclusions: This study demonstrates a high prevalence of pSSD among people with hypothyroidism and associations between pSSD and negative patient outcomes, including a tendency to attribute persistent symptoms to hypothyroidism or its treatment. SSD may be an important determinant of dissatisfaction with treatment and care among some hypothyroid patients.

Somatization and Somatic Symptom Disorder and its overlap with dimensionally measured personality pathology: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Difficulties in the assessments of Somatoform Disorders (SD) and Personality Disorders (PD) regarding operationalization, arbitrary thresholds, and reliability led to a shift from categorical to dimensional models in the DSM-5. Empirical research data postulates a continuous level of severity in both groups of diseases. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the overlap between somatization and personality pathology.

METHODS

Until July 2020, we conducted a systematic literature search with PubMed, Web of Science and SCOPUS. We specifically reviewed current empirical data on the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) and Somatic Symptom Disorder (SSD) and SD. Data was drawn out using predefined data panels. Results were reflected in the context of the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) model. Risk of bias was assessed due to blinding, randomization, selective reporting, incomplete data, and attribution bias.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies (N = 2979) met the inclusion criteria. Whereas categorical measures revealed mixed results, positive correlations between SD/SSD and dimensionally measured personality functioning were present in four studies (N = 1741). In three studies (N = 2025) correlations between SD/SSD and neuroticism/negative affectivity (d = 0.22-1.041) were present. Moreover, harm avoidant (d = 0.526 - 0.826) and self-defeating traits (d = 0.892) revealed significant associations with somatization.

CONCLUSIONS

Dimensional personality assessments are highly neglected in patients with SSD and warrant further research. However, in line with the HiTOP model, there is tentative evidence that somatization can be described as an independent personality trait, which shows most striking overlaps with self-pathologies (Criterion A) and the trait of negative affectivity (Criterion B).

Reduced hippocampus and amygdala volumes in antisocial personality disorder

In the present paper, we aimed to investigate hippocampus and amygdala volumes in a group of patients with antisocial personality disorder and hypothesized that hippocampus and amygdala volume alterations would be observed. It was measured hippocampus and amygdala volumes of twenty patients with antisocial personality disorder and those of healthy control subjects. We found that both sides of hippocampus and amygdala volumes of patients with antisocial personality disorder were statistically significantly reduced compared to those healthy control subjects, and observed statistically important correlations between the left and right and left hippocampus and left amygdala volumes, and age, some results on scale scores. Consequently, the present study suggest that hippocampus and amygdala volumes of patients with antisocial personality disorder had abnormally smaller than those of healthy control subjects, considering that these abnormalities might be associated with at least some clinical features of antisocial personality disorder. However, longitudinal studies are needed to assess causality of this relationship.

Psychotherapy of Dependent Personality Disorder: The Relationship of Patient-Therapist Interactions to Outcome

So far, only a few studies have focused on psychotherapy for Dependent Personality Disorder (DPD). DPD is marked by a repetitive pattern of efforts aiming at maintaining close relationships, which may present as a lack of assertiveness and as a difficulty in making routine decisions. The present study aims at exploring processes of change taking place during the working phase of a clarification-oriented psychotherapy (COP) by focusing on the in-session patient-therapist interaction, as it changes during treatment and their links with treatment outcome. Methods: N = 74 patients with DPD were recruited in a naturalistic setting; they underwent long-term COP. Sessions 15, 20 and 25 were video- or audio-recorded and analyzed using the Process-Content-Relationship Scale, an observer-rated instrument that measures the quality of the interaction processes from patient's and therapist's perspectives. Therapy outcomes were assessed with the Personality Inventory - Dependency Subscale, Beck Depression Inventory, Inventory of Interpersonal Problems and Self-efficacy Scale at intake and discharge of therapy. Three-level Hierarchical Linear Modeling was applied to test the hypotheses. Results: Improvement in interaction processes was observed in all patient's and therapist's variables over the sessions 15, 20, 25. Overall, this increase in quality of interaction process was unrelated with outcome, but decrease in dependency traits was predicted by increase in therapist's quality of relationship offer, understanding of content and directivity over the course of the working phase of COP. Conclusions: Studying interaction processes in DPD provides an initial understanding of differential roles of potential mechanisms of change in effective treatment.

Borderline Personality Disorder in Patients With Medical Illness: A Review of Assessment, Prevalence, and Treatment Options

OBJECTIVE

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) occurs in 0.7% to 3.5% of the general population. Patients with BPD experience excessive comorbidity of psychiatric and somatic diseases and are known to be high users of health care services. Because of a range of challenges related to adverse health behaviors and their interpersonal style, patients with BPD are often regarded as "difficult" to interact with and treat optimally.

METHODS

This narrative review focuses on epidemiological studies on BPD and its comorbidity with a specific focus on somatic illness. Empirically validated treatments are summarized, and implementation of specific treatment models is discussed.

RESULTS

The prevalence of BPD among psychiatric inpatients (9%-14%) and outpatients (12%-18%) is high; medical service use is very frequent, annual societal costs vary between &OV0556;11,000 and &OV0556;28,000. BPD is associated with cardiovascular diseases and stroke, metabolic disease including diabetes and obesity, gastrointestinal disease, arthritis and chronic pain, venereal diseases, and HIV infection as well as sleep disorders. Psychotherapy is the treatment of choice for BPD. Several manualized treatments for BPD have been empirically validated, including dialectical behavior therapy, transference-focused psychotherapy, mentalization-based therapy, and schema-focused therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care could be substantially improved if all medical specialties would be familiar with BPD, its pathology, medical and psychiatric comorbidities, complications, and treatment. In mental health care, several empirically validated treatments that are applicable in a wide range of clinical settings are available.

[Suicide risk in somatoform disorders]

BACKGROUND

The somatoform disorders include a group of complex disorders consist of somatic symptoms for which there are no identifiable organic cause or pathogenetic mechanisms. Given the importance of these disorders and the need to clarify the diagnosis of somatoform disorder affecting the suicide risk, we took into consideration the scientific literature to investigate the correlation between the two conditions.

METHODS

We performed a bibliographic search through Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, SciELO, ORCID, Google Scholar, DOAJ using the following terms: somatoform, somatization disorder, pain disorder AND psychological factor, suicide, parasuicide, suicidality.

RESULTS

In all studies reported in our review, the suicidal behavior risk is high. But in the majority, the data are relatively unreliable because it takes into account the category nosographic "Neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders", too wide to be able to identify the clinical characteristics of patients at risk of only somatoform disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

Several studies conclude that psychiatric comorbidity increases the suicide risk: patients with two or more psychiatric disorders are more likely to commit a suicide attempt; in particular if there is a axis I diagnosis, the risk reduplicate. The somatization disorder seems to have a significant psychiatric comorbidity in particular with anxious and affective disorders spectrum.

Big Five personality traits and medically unexplained symptoms in later life

BACKGROUND

Personality dysfunction has been postulated as the most clinically salient problem of persons suffering from medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) but empirical studies are scarce. This study aims to compare the personality profile of older patients suffering from MUS with two comparison groups and a control group.

METHODS

Ninety-six older patients with MUS were compared with 153 frequent attenders in primary care suffering from medically explained symptoms (MES), 255 patients with a past-month depressive disorder (DSM-IV-TR), and a control group of 125 older persons. The Big Five personality domains (NEO-Five-Factor Inventory) were compared between groups by multiple ANCOVAs adjusted for age, sex, education, partner status and cognitive functioning. Linear regression analyses were applied to examine the association between health anxiety (Whitley Index) and somatization (Brief Symptom Inventory).

RESULTS

The four groups differed with respect to neuroticism (P<0.001), extraversion (P<0.001), and agreeableness (P=0.045). Post hoc analyses, showed that MUS patients compared to controls scored higher on neuroticism and agreeableness, and compared to depressed patients lower on neuroticism and higher on extraversion as well agreeableness. Interestingly, MUS and MES patients had a similar personality profile. Health anxiety and somatization were associated with a higher level of neuroticism and a lower level of extraversion and conscientiousness, irrespective whether the physical symptom was explained or not.

CONCLUSIONS

Older patients with MUS have a specific personality profile, comparable to MES patients. Health anxiety and somatization may be better indicators of psychopathology than whether a physical symptom is medically explained or not.

Approach to the patient with multiple somatic symptoms

Primary care providers play a crucial role in the recognition and appropriate treatment of patients with multiple somatic complaints. Both the number of somatic symptoms and the persistence of symptoms are associated with co-occurring depression or anxiety disorders. It can be challenging to simultaneously address possible medical causes for physical symptoms while also considering an associated psychiatric diagnosis. In this article, strategies to improve the care and outcomes among these patients are described, including collaboration, education about the interaction between psychosocial stressors and somatic symptoms, regularly scheduled visits, focus on improving functional status, and evidence-based treatment of depression and anxiety.

Medically unexplained symptoms

In summary, caring for patients with MUS is challenging for health care providers. Even defining somatization syndromes is complex and controversial, reflecting the medical community’s limited understanding of the pathophysiology for this group of disorders. Although risk factors for MUS have been described and are well understood, little is known about how MUS can be prevented. Uncertainty in medicine, as in any human enterprise, is a given, but the difficulties in identification and treatment of patients with MUS highlight the limitations in understanding the intersection between physical and mental health. Patients come to their physician looking for clarity, understanding, and relief of debilitating symptoms. The understanding of MUS will evolve, and perhaps an organic cause not yet understood or described may emerge to lend clarity and therapeutic opportunities to some patients with somatic disorders. In the meantime, the most powerful tools available are the ability to communicate the limits of current understanding, acknowledge the difficulties faced by patients with this disorder, and reinforce the willingness and desire of clinicians to partner with patients as the focus shifts from diagnosis to symptom management. Thus, the physician-patient relationship, still in its rightful place at the heart of the practice of medicine, lies at the center of effective treatment of patients with MUS.

Patients with unexplained physical symptoms have poorer quality of life and higher costs than other patient groups: a cross-sectional study on burden

Background

To determine whether healthcare resources are allocated fairly, it is helpful to have information on the quality of life (QoL) of patients with Unexplained Physical Symptoms (UPS) and on the costs associated with them, and on how these relate to corresponding data in other patient groups. As studies to date have been limited to specific patient populations with UPS, the objective of this study was to assess QoL and costs in a general sample of patients with UPS using generic measures.

Methods

In a cross-sectional study, 162 patients with UPS reported on their QoL, use of healthcare resources and lost productivity in paid and unpaid work. To assess QoL, the generic SF-36 questionnaire was used, from which multidimensional quality-of-life scores and a one-dimensional score (utility) using the SF-6D scorings algorithm were derived. To assess costs, the TiC-P questionnaire was used.

Results

Patients with UPS reported a poor QoL. Their QoL was mostly decreased by limitations in functioning due to physical health, and the least by limitations in functioning due to emotional problems. The median of utilities was 0.57, and the mean was 0.58 (SD = .09).

The cost for the use of healthcare services was estimated to be €3,123 (SD = €2,952) per patient per year. This cost was enlarged by work-related costs: absence from work (absenteeism), lower on-the-job productivity (presenteeism), and paid substitution of domestic tasks. The resulting mean total cost was estimated to be €6,815 per patient per year.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that patients with UPS have a high burden of disease and use a considerable amount of healthcare resources. In comparison with other patient groups, the QoL values of patients with UPS were among the poorest and their costs were among the highest of all patient groups. The burden for both patients and society helps to justify the allocation of sufficient resources to effective treatment for patients with UPS.

Trial registration

Nederlands Trial Register, NTR1609

Emergency room validation of the revised Suicide Trigger Scale (STS-3): a measure of a hypothesized suicide trigger state

BACKGROUND

The Suicide Trigger Scale (STS) was designed to measure the construct of an affective 'suicide trigger state.' This study aims to extend the inpatient setting validation study of the original Suicide Trigger Scale version 2 to the revised Suicide Trigger Scale version 3 (STS-3) in an acute psychiatric emergency room setting.

METHODS

The 42-item STS-3 and a brief psychological test battery were administered to 183 adult psychiatric patients with suicidal ideation or attempt in the psychiatric emergency room, and re-administered to subjects at 1 year follow up. Factor analysis, linear and logistic regressions were used to examine construct structure, divergent and convergent validity, and construct validity, respectively.

RESULTS

The STS-3 demonstrated strong internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.94). Factor analysis yielded a three-factor solution, which explained 43.4% of the variance. Principal axis factor analysis was used to identify three reliable subscales: Frantic Hopelessness, Ruminative Flooding, and Near-Psychotic Somatization (Cronbach's alphas 0.90, 0.80, and 0.76, respectively). Significant positive associations were observed between Frantic Hopelessness and BSI depression and anxiety subscales, between Ruminative Flooding and BSI anxiety and paranoia subscales, and Near Psychotic Somatization and BSI somatization subscales. Suicidal subjects with suicide attempt history had mean scores 7 points higher than those without history of suicide attempts. Frantic hopelessness was a significant predictor of current suicide attempt when only attempts requiring at least some medical attention were considered.

CONCLUSION

The STS-3 measures a distinct clinical entity, provisionally termed the 'suicide trigger state.' Scores on the STS-3 or select subscales appear to relate to degree of suicidality in terms of severity of ideation, history of attempt, and presence of substantive current attempts. Further study is required to confirm the factor structure and better understand the nature of these relations.

Effective group training for patients with unexplained physical symptoms: a randomized controlled trial with a non-randomized one-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Although cognitive-behavioral therapy for Unexplained Physical Symptoms (UPS) is effective in secondary care, studies done in primary care produced implementation problems and conflicting results. We evaluated the effectiveness of a cognitive-behavioral group training tailored to primary care patients and provided by a secondary community mental-health service reaching out into primary care.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The effectiveness of this training was explored in a randomized controlled trial. In this trial, 162 patients with UPS classified as undifferentiated somatoform disorder or as chronic pain disorder were randomized either to the training or a waiting list. Both lasted 13 weeks. The preservation of the training's effect was analyzed in non-randomized follow-ups, for which the waiting group started the training after the waiting period. All patients attended the training were followed-up after three months and again after one year. The primary outcomes were the physical and the mental summary scales of the SF-36. Secondary outcomes were the other SF-36-scales and the SCL-90-R. The courses of the training's effects in the randomized controlled trial and the follow-ups were analyzed with linear mixed modeling. In the randomized controlled trial, the training had a significantly positive effect on the quality of life in the physical domain (Cohen's d = 0.38;p = .002), but this overall effect was not found in the mental domain. Regarding the secondary outcomes, the training resulted in reporting an improved physical (Cohen's d = 0.43;p = 0.01), emotional (Cohen's d = 0.44;p = 0.01), and social (Cohen's d = 0.36;p = 0.01) functioning, less pain and better functioning despite pain (Cohen's d = 0.51;p = <0.001), less physical symptoms (Cohen's d = -.23;p = 0.05) and less sleep difficulties (Cohen's d = -0.25;p = 0.04) than time in the waiting group. During the non-randomized follow-ups, there were no relapses.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

The cognitive-behavioral group training tailored for UPS in primary care and provided by an outreaching secondary mental-health service appears to be effective and to broaden the accessibility of treatment for UPS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

TrialRegister.nl NTR1609

Patients with medically unexplained symptoms and their significant others: illness attributions and behaviors as predictors of patient functioning over time

OBJECTIVE

Previous research suggests that medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are maintained in an interpersonal context. The current study examined MUS concurrently and prospectively by measuring specific interpersonal predictors of symptom severity and health care use.

METHODS

A total of 127 patients with MUS and their significant others were recruited through primary care offices and assessed with self-report questionnaires and structured interviews about illness attributions, illness behavior and responses, relationship quality, symptom severity, and health care use at baseline and 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Illness attributions and interpersonal illness behaviors of patients with MUS were cross-sectionally associated with illness attributions and responses of the patients' significant others. Relationship quality was related to specific illness behaviors and responses. Symptom severity at baseline was predicted by patients' somatic illness attributions. Symptom severity at 6-month follow-up was predicted by somatic illness attributions of patients and withdrawal of patients' significant others at baseline, but these predictors became insignificant when correcting for baseline symptomatology. Health care use at baseline was predicted by a greater amount of coping behavior and higher anxiety scores of patients, and health care use at 6-month follow-up was predicted by more attention-seeking behaviors and health care use of patients at baseline.

CONCLUSION

The results document the interpersonal influences on the maintenance of MUS. The perspective of significant others should be considered for enhancement of psychological approaches to the treatment of patients with MUS.

Explaining medically unexplained symptoms-models and mechanisms

We summarize the psychological mechanisms that have been linked to the development and maintenance of medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). Many models postulate that patients with MUS misinterpret physical sensations and show other cognitive abnormalities (e.g., an over-exclusive concept of health) that play a major role in symptom development. While there is strong evidence for the role of cognitive aspects, there is less evidence for their interaction with perceptual features (e.g., perceptual sensitivity, lowered perceptual threshold). Modern neuroimaging techniques show that the expectation of symptoms leads to the activation of brain areas corresponding to symptom perception, while distraction from symptoms reduces brain activity in perception areas. The frequently postulated monocausal organic attribution for physical sensations by patients with MUS needs to be modified, as many patients report multiple symptom attributions, including psychological. Symptom attributions and causal models depend on memorized concepts, and so memory processes need to be investigated in more detail. Aberrations in memory processes not only offer a link to understanding perceptual processes, but are also involved in doctor-patient interaction. This encounter is characterized by unsuccessful medical reassurance, which again involves memory processes. We conclude that psychological mechanisms such as expectation, distraction, and memory processes need to be integrated with biological models to aid understanding of MUS.

Personality Disorders

Personality disorders are gaining a similar level of attention in the primary care literature as afforded to mood, anxiety, and substance abuse disorders. A personality disorder-comorbid with a medical or other psychiatric diagnosis-presents a challenge for primary care physicians because of diagnostic and treatment dilemmas, as well as management of the physician's interpersonal reaction to the patient. This article reviews research on prevalence, clinical presentation and assessment, and treatment, with specific recommendations for primary care physicians. Strategies to enhance the physician-patient relationship, including the use of empathic skills and the facilitation of physician well-being, are presented. Integrating these tools into routine practice can lead to more satisfying treatment relationships between primary care physicians and patients who have personality disorders.

Personality disorders in somatization disorder patients: a controlled study in Spain

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to assess personality disorder (PD) comorbidity in somatization disorder (SD) patients compared with psychiatric controls in a Spanish sample.

METHODS

This is a case-control study. Selection of 70 consecutive SD patients was made, and an age-, sex-, and ethnic-group-matched control group of 70 mood and/or anxiety disorder patients recruited in psychiatric outpatient clinics was selected. PDs were measured using the International Personality Disorder Examination, and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition Axis I morbidity was measured by means of the Standardized Polyvalent Psychiatric Interview.

RESULTS

PD comorbidity in SD patients was 62.9%, compared to 28.2% in controls [odds ratio (OR)=3.7; 95% confidence interval (95% CI)=1.8-7.6]. The highest ORs of PD in SD patients, compared with controls, were for paranoid (OR=9.2; 95% CI=1.9-43), obsessive-compulsive (OR=6.2; 95% CI=1.2-53.6), and histrionic (OR=3.6; 95% CI=0.9-13.9) PDs.

CONCLUSIONS

This is a controlled study with the largest sample of SD patients. The prevalence of PD comorbidity is similar to that of a previously published controlled study but is different from those of the most frequent PD subtypes.

Classification and diagnosis of patients with medically unexplained symptoms

Patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) have little or no demonstrable disease explanation for the symptoms, and comorbid psychiatric disorders are frequent. Although common, costly, distressed, and often receiving ill-advised testing and treatments, most MUS patients go unrecognized, which precludes effective treatment. To enhance recognition, we present an emerging perspective that envisions a unitary classification for the entire spectrum of MUS where this diagnosis comprises severity, duration, and comorbidity. We then present a specific approach for making the diagnosis at each level of severity. Although our disease-based diagnosis system dictates excluding organic disease to diagnose MUS, much exclusion can occur clinically without recourse to laboratory or consultative evaluation because the majority of patients are mild. Only the less common, "difficult" patients with moderate and severe MUS require investigation to exclude organic diseases. By explicitly diagnosing and labeling all severity levels of MUS, we propose that this diagnostic approach cannot only facilitate effective treatment but also reduce the cost and morbidity from unnecessary interventions.

Distinguishing between hypochondriasis and somatization disorder: a review of the existing literature

A valid classification is important for further understanding of the somatoform disorders. The main disorders in this grouping - somatization disorder and hypochondriasis - have lengthy historical traditions and are defined in a contrasting manner. Various authors point to distinguishing demographic and clinical features, but there have been few direct comparisons of patients with these disorders. A review of the literature indicates those domains where differences are most likely to be found. Research assessing these may serve to refine and validate these key somatoform categories and/or dimensions.

Study of stress and vulnerability in patients with somatoform and dissociative disorders in a psychiatric clinic in North India

The authors compared perceived stress in subgroups of patients defined by vulnerability (high and low) and disorder (somatoform and dissociative). A total of 30 patients each of somatoform and dissociative disorders diagnosed according to the classification of mental and behavioral disorders criteria were assessed with Presumptive Stressful Life Event Scale, The Hassles Scale, Psychoticism Extraversion Neuroticism Inventory, Dissociative Experience Scale, Twenty-Item Toronto Alexithyma Scale, and Illness Behavior Questionnaire. Somatoform and dissociative disorder groups had comparable scores on measures of perceived stress and vulnerability. Two-way anova showed significant main effect of neuroticism (F = 13.65, d.f. = 1.56, P < 0.01), psychoticism (F = 7.92, d.f. = 1.56, P < 0.01), illness behavior (F = 5.82, d.f. = 1.56, P < 0.05), and dissociative experience (F = 8.45, d.f. = 1.56, P < 0.01) on total hassles score, but no significant main effect of disorder groups or interaction effect for disorder and vulnerability was seen on total hassles score. No significant main or interaction effect was seen on life events score. Similarities were seen in stress and vulnerability factors in the two disorders. Neuroticism, psychoticism, dissociative experience, and abnormal illness behavior were significantly related to stress (daily hassles) perceived by the patient, irrespective of the disorder.

Symptoms, syndromes, and the value of psychiatric diagnostics in patients who have functional somatic disorders

Half of all outpatient encounters are precipitated by physical complaints, of which one third to one half are medically unexplained symptoms, and 20% to 25% are chronic or recurrent. Many of the patients suffer from one or more discrete symptoms, whereas others have functional somatic syndromes. Individual symptoms and somatic syndromes are associated with impaired quality of life, increased health care use, and diminished patient and provider satisfaction. This article provides an overview of (1) unexplained symptoms and somatization; (2) limitations of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition in classifying somatoform disorders; (3) predictors of psychiatric comorbidity in patients who have physical symptoms; and (4) measurement and management of symptoms.

Antisocial personality disorder is associated with increased severity of gambling, medical, drug and psychiatric problems among treatment-seeking pathological gamblers

AIMS

To evaluate systematically whether pathological gamblers with antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) experience increased severity of gambling, medical, psychiatric, substance use and psychosocial problems compared to pathological gamblers without ASPD. PARTICIPANTS, DESIGN AND MEASUREMENTS: Pathological gamblers (n = 237) entering an out-patient treatment study for pathological gambling completed the ASPD section of the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual version IV (DSM-IV) Personality Disorders, California Psychological Inventory-Socialization Scale, Addiction Severity Index (ASI), Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) and gambling questionnaires.

SETTING

Pathological gambling research clinic.

FINDINGS

Thirty-nine (16.5%) pathological gamblers met DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for ASPD. Compared to pathological gamblers without ASPD, pathological gamblers with ASPD were younger, more likely to be male and divorced/separated, and had fewer years of education. They also began gambling earlier in life, reported increased severity of gambling, medical and drug problems, and scored higher on the paranoid ideation, somatization and phobic anxiety subscales of the BSI. Further, logistic regression identified male gender, history of illicit drug use and severity of gambling and medical problems as independent predictors of ASPD.

CONCLUSIONS

These results underscore the importance of assessing a wide range of behaviors and personality indices, including ASPD, among treatment-seeking pathological gamblers.

Suicide Risk in Patients with Somatization Disorder

Summary: The aim of the study was to assess suicide risk in psychiatric outpatients with and without somatization disorder. A total sample of 120 psychiatric outpatients was used in the study, 29 of whom met diagnostic criteria for somatization disorder. The results indicated that somatization disorder was significantly associated with suicide attempts even when the effects of both a comorbid major depressive disorder and a comorbid personality disorder were statistically controlled for. The results suggest that, although a patient meets the criteria for a principal diagnosis of major depressive disorder and/or a personality disorder, it is still of significant importance to decide whether or not the patient also meets the criteria for a somatization disorder in order to more optimally assess suicide risk. The findings highlight the fact that the potential for suicide in patients with somatization disorder should not be overlooked when a diagnosable depressive disorder or personality disorder is not present.

Are syndromes in environmental medicine variants of somatoform disorders?

To date, relatively little is known about the etiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, therapy, prevention and prognosis of environment-related syndromes like multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), idiopathic environmental intolerance (IEI), sick building syndrome (SBS), chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), candida syndrome (CS) and burnout syndrome (BS). Part of the reason is that these syndromes have not been clearly defined and classified in scientific categories distinct from each other, and that they show clinical similarities to classified somatoform disorders. Furthermore, there are at least three possible explanations for the existence of these syndromes: (1) The syndromes may result from the interaction of environmental factors, individual susceptibility and psychological factors (i.e., how they are perceived and seen by the patient); (2) they may reflect socially and culturally accepted methods of expressing distress; and/or (3) they may be iatrogenic. Despite all the uncertainties in evaluation of environmental syndromes, physicians have the duty to take the affected person's problems seriously. A comprehensive systematic classification which better accounts for these complex clinical manifestations is long overdue. Until these syndromes are well defined, the terms used for them should definitely not be applied to connote a specific disease process.

Somatoform disorders in consultation-liaison psychiatry: a comparison with other mental disorders

Consultation-liaison (C-L) psychiatry has an important role in the management of somatoform disorders (SD). Characteristics of SD patients in C-L psychiatry are largely unknown and are presented in this paper. We analyzed 13,314 Dutch psychiatric consultations from 1984 to 1991 and compared patients diagnosed with SD to patients with other mental disorders and to those without a mental disorder. The comparison included socio-demographic variables, consult characteristics, medical history, current somatic morbidity, information about additional diagnostic tests, hospital admission time and aftercare management. Of the 544 SD patients 39.5% (n = 215) were diagnosed with a conversion disorder that illustrates the highly selected nature of SD patients in C-L psychiatry. Employment among SD patients decreased significantly from 58% in the group aged 20-29 years to 6% in the group aged 50-59 years. This decrease was significantly larger as compared to other mental disorders and no mental disorders and was virtually unaffected by correction for potential confounding by gender. Contrary to our expectation no difference between the three groups was observed in claims for disability benefits. Of the SD patients 74.5% were referred for aftercare management, significantly more than the other two groups which is considered a promising development in C-L psychiatry.

Clinical Manifestations and Management of Conversion Disorders

Conversion disorder, the acute onset of sensory or motor loss unexplained by physical findings, has long been reported in the neurologic and psychiatric literature. It was once thought to be largely covariate with the "hysterical" (now referred to as "histrionic") personality, but recent work finds that conversion disorder more often presents in the absence of this personality disorder. Conversion disorder may also be part of a chronic pattern of physical expression of psychologic distress known as somatization disorder. Other psychiatric illnesses (particularly mood and anxiety disorders) are frequently comorbid, and conversion disorder and their treatment may affect the prognosis of conversion disorder symptoms. The neurologist suspecting a case of conversion disorder is advised to complete a thorough neurologic evaluation, and to have a low threshold for psychiatric consultation, which facilitates prompt comanagement that may increase the likelihood of a return to premorbid function.

Personality dysfunction among somatizing patients

To examine the nature and extent of personality dysfunction related to somatization, the authors administered the Structured Interview for DSM-IV Personality and the NEO Five-Factor Inventory to a series of somatizing and nonsomatizing patients in a general medicine clinic. A greater percentage of somatizers met criteria for one or more DSM-IV personality disorders, especially obsessive-compulsive disorder, than did control patients. Somatizers also differed from control patients with respect to self-defeating, depressive, and negativistic personality traits and scored higher on the dimension of neuroticism and lower on the dimension of agreeableness. In addition, initial and facultative somatizers showed more personality pathology than true somatizers. These findings suggest that certain personality disorders and traits contribute to somatization by way of increased symptom reporting and care-seeking behavior.

Somatization Disorder

There are many new developments regarding somatization disorder, which is among the most difficult and cumbersome of the psychiatric disorders encountered in neurology practice. Diagnostic criteria have been revised to facilitate clinical care and research. The differential diagnosis includes neurologic disorders (eg, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy), systemic medical disorders, and other psychiatric disorders (eg, mood and anxiety disorders, conversion disorder, malingering, and factitious disorder). Many patients have one or more of these illnesses comorbid with somatization disorder. Finally, somatization disorder demands creative biopsychosocial treatment planning by the neurologist, psychiatrist, and other health professionals.

The no-fault flavor of disability syndromes

There are many controversial disability syndromes, representing medicolegal and social dilemmas for a variety of medical disciplines. Health care professionals are at a loss to cure these patients, and judges and disability review boards struggle to be fair while at the same time trying to understand the basis and appropriateness of the ever-growing claims of disability. We review these disability syndromes, examining the basis for their existence, their mechanism, and how these patients can better be understood in a constructive and helpful manner. In doing so, we emphasize the sick role, illness behavior, secondary and tertiary gain, and somatization.

Perceptions of parents' health status and relationship to somatic preoccupation

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to examine the potential relationship of family factors to somatic preoccupation.

METHOD

A total of 116 internal medicine patients completed research booklets exploring perceptions of parents' health, childhood trauma, borderline personality symptomatology [Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-Revised (PDQ-R)], and somatic preoccupation (Bradford Somatic Inventory).

RESULTS

Simple correlations revealed that most of the relationships between somatic preoccupation and remaining study variables were statistically significant (e.g., poor parental health status correlated to somatic preoccupation). Using path analysis, poor perception of mother's health demonstrated an indirect effect on somatic preoccupation via borderline personality symptomatology, whereas, poor perception of father's health demonstrated an indirect effect on somatic preoccupation via childhood trauma. Neither parents' health status demonstrated direct effects on somatic preoccupation.

CONCLUSIONS

There appear to be parent gender differences in the mediation of the relationship between poor parental health status and somatic preoccupation in the offspring. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Is alexithymia a risk factor for unexplained physical symptoms in general medical outpatients?

OBJECTIVE

Alexithymia is presumed to play an important predisposing role in the pathogenesis of medically unexplained physical symptoms. However, no research on alexithymia has been done among general medical outpatients who present with medically unexplained physical symptoms as their main problem and in which anxiety and depression have been considered as possible confounding factors. This study investigated whether patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms are more alexithymic than those with explained symptoms and whether, in patients with unexplained symptoms, alexithymia is associated with subjective health experience and use of medical services.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study among patients attending an internal medicine outpatient clinic. All patients were given a standardized interview and completed a number of questionnaires.

RESULTS

After complete physical examinations, 169 of 321 patients had unexplained physical symptoms according to two independent raters. Patients with medically unexplained symptoms more often had a mental disorder, but overall they were not more alexithymic. In patients with unexplained physical symptoms, alexithymia was not associated with subjective health experience or use of medical services. However, patients with both unexplained symptoms and a mental disorder who also denied any possible connection between emotional problems and their physical symptoms did have more alexithymic traits.

CONCLUSIONS

In the majority of patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms, alexithymia does not play a role of clinical significance. Patients with unexplained physical symptoms are heterogeneous with respect to psychiatric syndrome pathology and probably also with respect to personality pathology.

Somatoform disorders: comorbidity with other DSM-III-R psychiatric diagnoses in Greece

From a total sample of 1,448 psychiatric outpatients, 175 (12.1%) received a diagnosis of a somatoform disorder according to DSM-III-R criteria. One hundred twenty-two (70%) of these patients had another current axis I diagnosis, and this rate increased to 79% (139 of 175) when lifetime psychiatric diagnoses were recorded. The most frequent comorbid diagnoses were depressive disorders, i.e., dysthymia and major depression, and then anxiety disorders, mainly panic disorder. One hundred ten (63%) of the somatoform patients met the criteria for a personality disorder, significantly higher than the rate (52%) for the rest of the total sample (n = 1,273), who were used as a control group. The most frequent comorbid personality disorders were histrionic, dependent, and personalities of cluster B in general. Hypochondriasis was the only somatoform disorder that was additionally significantly related to obsessive-compulsive personality disorder. Somatoform patients with a concomitant personality disorder manifested more severe overall psychopathology as measured by the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and a worse level of functioning than those without. The results of the present study show that (1) patients with somatoform disorders have a high rate of comorbidity with other clinical syndromes and personality disorders, and (2) the presence of a personality disorder is related to more severe overall psychopathology and a worse level of functioning. All of the above indicate that special attention must be paid to the interaction between somatoform disorders, other clinical syndromes, and personality structure at the level of both clinical and research practice.

The somatizing patient

Somatization is the experience of physical symptoms in response to emotional distress. It is common, costly, and frustrating to both the patient and physician. Successful treatment of somatization requires the physician to pursue a positive diagnosis rather than rely on a diagnosis of exclusion. Treatment consists of giving an acceptable explanation of the symptoms to the patient, avoiding unwarranted interventions, and arranging brief but regular office visits for which the patient does not need to develop a new symptom to receive medical attention.

Effect of comorbid anxiety, depressive, and personality disorders on treatment outcome of somatoform disorders

Comorbid mental disorders of DSM-IV axis I and axis II have repeatedly been found to be a negative predictor for the treatment of axis I disorders, although recent contrary findings exist. Little is known about the effect of comorbidity on the therapy outcome of somatoform disorders. We compared three types of comorbidity, (1) personality disorders (PDs), (2) major depression (MDD) and anxiety (ANX) disorders, and (3) PDS and MDD and ANX, with regard to their relevance for the treatment outcome of somatoform disorders. One hundred twenty-six inpatients were assessed at least 4 weeks before admission to treatment, upon admission, and again at discharge. Somatoform, hypochondriacal, and depressive symptomatology, dysfunctional cognitions about body and health, dysfunctional social relationships, and other clinical characteristics were measured. Diagnostic assessments were based on the DSM-IV. Our findings suggest that none of the three types of comorbidity influence the therapy outcome of somatoform disorders or have a modifying effect on the level of psychopathology.

Attachment and interpersonal communication in somatization

The authors review the research on childhood antecedents and personality contributions to the somatoform disorders, as well as research on social influences during adulthood. Based on these data, the authors hypothesize that somatizing patients display anxious attachment behavior that derives from childhood experiences with caregivers. Early exposure to illness increases the likelihood that distress will be manifested somatically. When under stress as adults, somatizers use physical complaints to elicit care. Somatizers' interpersonal interactions with others, including physicians, ultimately lead to rejection that reinforces the somatizer's belief that he or she will be abandoned. Modification of physicians' responses to these patients may improve treatment outcomes.

The difficult patient: prevalence, psychopathology, and functional impairment

OBJECTIVE

To determine the proportion of primary care patients who are experienced by their physicians as "difficult," and to assess the association of difficulty with physical and mental disorders, functional impairment, health care utilization, and satisfaction with medical care.

DESIGN

Survey.

SETTING

Four primary care clinics.

PATIENTS

Six-hundred twenty-seven adult patients.

MEASUREMENTS

Physician perception of difficulty (Difficult Doctor-Patient Relationship Questionnaire), mental disorders and symptoms (Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders, [PRIME-MDI]), functional status (Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey [SF-20]), utilization of and satisfaction with medical care by patient self-report.

RESULTS

Physicians rated 96 (15%) of their 627 patients as difficult (site range 11-20%). Difficult patients were much more likely than not-difficult patients to have a mental disorder (67% vs 35% [corrected], p < .0001). Six psychiatric disorders had particularly strong associations with difficulty: multisomatoform disorder (odds ratio [OR] = 12.3. 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.9-26.8), panic disorder (OR = 6.9, 95% CI = 2.6-18.1), dysthymia (OR = 4.2, 95% CI = 2.0-8.7), generalized anxiety (OR = 3.4, 95% CI = 1.7-7.1), major depressive disorder (OR = 3.0, 95% CI = 1.8-5.3), and probable alcohol abuse or dependence (OR = 2.6, 95% CI = 1.01-6.7). Compared with not-difficult patients, difficult patients had more functional impairment, higher health care utilization, and lower satisfaction with care, whereas demographic characteristics and physical illnesses were not associated with difficulty. The presence of mental disorders accounted for a substantial proportion of the excess functional impairment and dissatisfaction in difficult patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Difficult patients are prevalent in primary care settings and have more psychiatric disorders, functional impairment, health care utilization, and dissatisfaction with care. Future studies are needed to determine whether improved diagnosis and management of mental disorders in difficult patients could diminish their excess disability, health care costs, and dissatisfaction with medical care, as well as the physicians experience of difficulty.

The role of personality factors in the reporting of side effect complaints to moclobemide and placebo: a study of healthy male and female volunteers

Although there is good evidence of a relationship between certain personality factors (viz. neuroticism and hypochondriasis) in the reporting of somatic symptoms-both in clinical and in nonclinical research-the recognition of the moderating role of individual differences in the frequency and intensity of side effect reporting is virtually absent from drug trial research. This study was a double-blind moclobemide-versus-placebo trial, the purpose of which was twofold: to investigate the degree of side effect complaints in a sample of healthy nonclinical men and women and to assess the role of personality in symptom reporting. Although there was no overall difference between the groups with respect to side effect complaints, there was a highly significant neuroticism x group x time interaction. In both groups, we found the expected positive relationship between neuroticism and symptom reporting at baseline. At the end of the study, however, this relationship was close to zero in the moclobemide group and had increased to close to 0.60 in the placebo group. These results were essentially replicated when neuroticism was substituted in the regression model by a psychometric measure of hypochondriasis. Our findings provide a striking demonstration of the role of personality factors in the placebo adverse response. As well, they indicate that adverse reactions to the medication were also linked to personality differences. Taken together, our results underscore the importance of considering individual differences in all aspects of pharmacologic research that involve subjective interpretation on the part of patients and subjects.

Somatoform and personality disorders: syndromal comorbidity and overlapping developmental pathways

We review the literature on the relationship between somatoform disorders and personality disorders, which reveals that approximately two in three patients with a somatoform disorder meet criteria for a personality disorder. We suggest that the most clinically salient problems presented by patients with somatoform disorders reflect dysfunctions of personality. We also examine research on the childhood antecedents of somatoform disorders and argue for reconsidering somatoform disorders, along with personality disorders, as disorders of development. Our argument involves rejecting the traditional approach to classification in favour of a prototypical polythetic view. We also suggest that the perspectives of developmental psychopathology and life-span research offer more to this field than the search for biological substrates or principles based on descriptive psychopathology, which to date have yielded meagre research findings with limited clinical utility.