Randomized trial of reattribution on psychosocial talk between doctors and patients with medically unexplained symptoms

Clinical skills development for healthcare practitioners working with patients with persistent physical symptoms (PPS) in healthcare settings: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

The complexity and uncertainty around Persistent Physical Symptoms (PPS) make it difficult to diagnose and treat, particularly under time-constrained consultations and limited knowledge. Brief interventions that can be utilised in day-to-day practice are necessary to improve ways of managing PPS. This review aimed to establish (i) what training primary and secondary healthcare practitioners have undertaken to develop their clinical skills when working with PPS, (ii) what training techniques or theoretical models have been used within these interventions, and (iii) how effective was the training.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was undertaken on eight databases to identify professional development interventions for healthcare practitioners working with PPS, were of any study design, and at a minimum were single measure studies (i.e., training outcome alone). Studies were assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) and narratively synthesised.

RESULTS

Despite high methodological heterogeneity across the six included studies, they all aimed to improve healthcare practitioners' communication skills through educational (theory, awareness, attitudes, assessment, treatment, and management of PPS) and experiential (role play) learning.

CONCLUSIONS

The review findings demonstrate that developing healthcare practitioners' communicative behaviours led to increased confidence and self-efficacy when working with PPS, which facilitated improved consultations and improvements on some patient outcomes. Barriers to the uptake of training programmes and implementation into daily clinical practice are discussed, including the need for PPS to be formally implemented into undergraduate teaching and post-qualification continuous professional development.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This review was registered at PROSPERO [CRD42022315631] prior to the review starting.

Behavioural modification interventions for medically unexplained symptoms in primary care: systematic reviews and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

The term 'medically unexplained symptoms' is used to cover a wide range of persistent bodily complaints for which adequate examination and appropriate investigations do not reveal sufficiently explanatory structural or other specified pathologies. A wide range of interventions may be delivered to patients presenting with medically unexplained symptoms in primary care. Many of these therapies aim to change the behaviours of the individual who may have worsening symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

An evidence synthesis to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of behavioural modification interventions for medically unexplained symptoms delivered in primary care settings was undertaken. Barriers to and facilitators of the effectiveness and acceptability of these interventions from the perspective of patients and service providers were evaluated through qualitative review and realist synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

Full search strategies were developed to identify relevant literature. Eleven electronic sources were searched. Eligibility criteria - for the review of clinical effectiveness, randomised controlled trials were sought. For the qualitative review, UK studies of any design were included. For the cost-effectiveness review, papers were restricted to UK studies reporting outcomes as quality-adjusted life-year gains. Clinical searches were conducted in November 2015 and December 2015, qualitative searches were conducted in July 2016 and economic searches were conducted in August 2016. The databases searched included MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO and EMBASE. Updated searches were conducted in February 2019 and March 2019.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult participants meeting the criteria for medically unexplained symptoms, including somatoform disorders, chronic unexplained pain and functional somatic syndromes.

INTERVENTIONS

Behavioural interventions were categorised into types. These included psychotherapies, exercise-based interventions, multimodal therapies (consisting of more than one intervention type), relaxation/stretching/social support/emotional support, guided self-help and general practitioner interventions, such as reattribution. Evidence synthesis: a network meta-analysis was conducted to allow a simultaneous comparison of all evaluated interventions in a single coherent analysis. Separate network meta-analyses were performed at three time points: end of treatment, short-term follow-up (< 6 months since the end of treatment) and long-term follow-up (≥ 6 months after the end of treatment). Outcomes included physical and psychological symptoms, physical functioning and impact of the illness on daily activities. Economic evaluation: within-trial estimates of cost-effectiveness were generated for the subset of studies where utility values (or quality-adjusted life-years) were reported or where these could be estimated by mapping from Short Form questionnaire-36 items or Short Form questionnaire-12 items outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies involving 9077 patients were included in the clinical effectiveness review. There was a large degree of heterogeneity both between and within intervention types, and the networks were sparse across all outcomes. At the end of treatment, behavioural interventions showed some beneficial effects when compared with usual care, in particular for improvement of specific physical symptoms [(1) pain: high-intensity cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBTHI) standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.54 [95% credible interval (CrI) 0.28 to 0.84], multimodal SMD 0.52 (95% CrI 0.19 to 0.89); and (2) fatigue: low-intensity cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBTLI) SMD 0.72 (95% CrI 0.27 to 1.21), relaxation/stretching/social support/emotional support SMD 0.87 (95% CrI 0.20 to 1.55), graded activity SMD 0.51 (95% CrI 0.14 to 0.93), multimodal SMD 0.52 (95% CrI 0.14 to 0.92)] and psychological outcomes [(1) anxiety CBTHI SMD 0.52 (95% CrI 0.06 to 0.96); (2) depression CBTHI SMD 0.80 (95% CrI 0.26 to 1.38); and (3) emotional distress other psychotherapy SMD 0.58 (95% CrI 0.05 to 1.13), relaxation/stretching/social support/emotional support SMD 0.66 (95% CrI 0.18 to 1.28) and sport/exercise SMD 0.49 (95% CrI 0.03 to 1.01)]. At short-term follow-up, behavioural interventions showed some beneficial effects for specific physical symptoms [(1) pain: CBTHI SMD 0.73 (95% CrI 0.10 to 1.39); (2) fatigue: CBTLI SMD 0.62 (95% CrI 0.11 to 1.14), relaxation/stretching/social support/emotional support SMD 0.51 (95% CrI 0.06 to 1.00)] and psychological outcomes [(1) anxiety: CBTHI SMD 0.74 (95% CrI 0.14 to 1.34); (2) depression: CBTHI SMD 0.93 (95% CrI 0.37 to 1.52); and (3) emotional distress: relaxation/stretching/social support/emotional support SMD 0.82 (95% CrI 0.02 to 1.65), multimodal SMD 0.43 (95% CrI 0.04 to 0.91)]. For physical functioning, only multimodal therapy showed beneficial effects: end-of-treatment SMD 0.33 (95% CrI 0.09 to 0.59); and short-term follow-up SMD 0.78 (95% CrI 0.23 to 1.40). For impact on daily activities, CBTHI was the only behavioural intervention to show beneficial effects [end-of-treatment SMD 1.30 (95% CrI 0.59 to 2.00); and short-term follow-up SMD 2.25 (95% CrI 1.34 to 3.16)]. Few effects remained at long-term follow-up. General practitioner interventions showed no significant beneficial effects for any outcome. No intervention group showed conclusive beneficial effects for measures of symptom load (somatisation). A large degree of heterogeneity was found across individual studies in the assessment of cost-effectiveness. Several studies suggested that the interventions produce fewer quality-adjusted life-years than usual care. For those interventions that generated quality-adjusted life-year gains, the mid-point incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from £1397 to £129,267, but, where the mid-point ICER fell below £30,000, the exploratory assessment of uncertainty suggested that it may be above £30,000.

LIMITATIONS

Sparse networks meant that it was not possible to conduct a metaregression to explain between-study differences in effects. Results were not consistent within intervention type, and there were considerable differences in characteristics between studies of the same type. There were moderate to high levels of statistical heterogeneity. Separate analyses were conducted for three time points and, therefore, analyses are not repeated-measures analyses and do not account for correlations between time points.

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural interventions showed some beneficial effects for specific medically unexplained symptoms, but no one behavioural intervention was effective across all medically unexplained symptoms. There was little evidence that these interventions are effective for measures of symptom load (somatisation). General practitioner-led interventions were not shown to be effective. Considerable heterogeneity in interventions, populations and sparse networks mean that results should be interpreted with caution. The relationship between patient and service provider is perceived to play a key role in facilitating a successful intervention. Future research should focus on testing the therapeutic effects of the general practitioner-patient relationship within trials of behavioural interventions, and explaining the observed between-study differences in effects within the same intervention type (e.g. with more detailed reporting of defined mechanisms of the interventions under study).

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015025520.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 46. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Do You Transfer Your Skills? From Sports to Health Management in Cancer Patients

Skill transfer is a process where personal cognitive and behavioral abilities are applied to contexts that are different from the one in which they were originally learned. Literature demonstrates that skill transferability is possible: for example, people can apply skills learned in sports to other life-domains (such as school, work, or health management) with the aim to improve individual characteristics and reach personal goals. To do this, several factors, such as positive communication, adequate context, a person-centered perspective, and specific strategies, are necessary. On the basis of this, the aim of this contribution is explore the relationship between sports and health management skills to enhance the coach/athlete as well as the patient/physician relationships. Useful strategies for skill transfer from sports to cancer management are shown.

The importance of contextual aspects in the care for patients with functional somatic symptoms

Functional somatic symptoms refer to physical symptoms that cannot be (bio) medically explained. The pattern or clustering of such symptoms may lead to functional syndromes like chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, among many others. Since the underlying pathophysiology remains unknown, several explanatory models have been proposed, nearly all including social and psychological parameters. These models have stimulated effectiveness studies of several psychological and psychopharmacological therapies. While the evidence for their effectiveness is steadily growing, effect-sizes are at most moderate and many patients do not benefit. We hypothesize that the context in which interventions for functional somatic symptoms are delivered substantially influences their effectiveness. Although this hypothesis is in line with explanatory models of functional somatic symptoms, to our knowledge, studies primarily focusing on the influence of contextual aspects on treatment outcome are scarce. Contextual research in the field of somatic symptoms has (irrespective whether these symptoms can be medically explained or not), however, just begun and already yielded some valuable results. These findings can be organized according to Duranti's and Goodwin's theoretical approach to context in order to substantiate our hypothesis. Based on this approach, we categorized empirical findings in three contextual aspects, i.e. 1) the setting, 2) the behavioural environment, and 3) the language environment. Collectively, some support is found for the fact that early identification of patients with functional somatic symptoms, starting treatment as soon as possible, having a neat appearance and an organized office interior, a warm and friendly nonverbal approach and a language use without defensiveness are contextual parameters which enhance the assessment by the patient of the physician's competence to help. Nonetheless, in vivo studies addressing the most aspects, i.e. nonverbal behaviour and language, are needed for better understanding of these contextual aspect. Moreover, future research should address to what extent optimizing contextual aspects improve care for functional somatic symptoms.

Patients' descriptions of the relation between physical symptoms and negative emotions: a qualitative analysis of primary care consultations

BACKGROUND

Primary care guidelines for the management of persistent, often 'medically unexplained', physical symptoms encourage GPs to discuss with patients how these symptoms relate to negative emotions. However, many GPs experience difficulties in reaching a shared understanding with patients.

AIM

To explore how patients with persistent symptoms describe their negative emotions in relation to their physical symptoms in primary care consultations, in order to help GPs recognise the patient's starting points in such discussions.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A qualitative analysis of 47 audiorecorded extended primary care consultations with 15 patients with persistent physical symptoms.

METHOD

The types of relationships patients described between their physical symptoms and their negative emotions were categorised using content analysis. In a secondary analysis, the study explored whether patients made transitions between the types of relations they described through the course of the consultations.

RESULTS

All patients talked spontaneously about their negative emotions. Three main categories of relations between these emotions and physical symptoms were identified: separated (negation of a link between the two); connected (symptom and emotion are distinct entities that are connected); and inseparable (symptom and emotion are combined within a single entity). Some patients showed a transition between categories of relations during the intervention.

CONCLUSION

Patients describe different types of relations between physical symptoms and negative emotions in consultations. Physical symptoms can be attributed to emotions when patients introduce this link themselves, but this link tends to be denied when introduced by the GP. Awareness of the ways patients discuss these relations could help GPs to better understand the patient's view and, in this way, collaboratively move towards constructive explanations and symptom management strategies.

Group supervision for healthcare professionals within primary care for patients with psychosomatic health problems: a pilot intervention study

BACKGROUND

In primary health care, efficacious treatment strategies are lacking for these patients, although the most prominent symptoms accounting for consultation in primary care often cannot be related to any biological causes.

AIM

The aim was to explore whether group supervision from a specific phenomenological theory of psychosomatics could provide healthcare professionals treating patients with psychosomatic health issues within primary care a deeper understanding of these conditions and stimulate profession-specific treatment strategies. Our research questions were as follows: (i) What is the healthcare professionals' understanding of psychosomatics before and after the intervention? (ii) What are the treatment strategies for this group of patients before and after the intervention?

METHODS

The study was an explorative qualitative intervention pilot study. The six participants from a primary healthcare setting in a medium-sized city in Sweden participated in the study. A supervision group was formed, based on a mix of professions, age, gender and years of clinical experience. Supervision consisted of one 75-minutes meeting every month during the course of 6 months. Participants were interviewed before and after the supervision intervention.

FINDINGS

The study showed two distinct categories emerged from the data. One category of healthcare professionals espoused a psycho-educative approach, while the other lacked a cohesive approach. The supervision improved the second category of healthcare professionals' understanding of psychosomatics. The psycho-educative group did not change their understanding of psychosomatics, although they felt strengthened in their approach by the supervision. Profession-specific strategies were not developed.

IMPLICATIONS

This pilot study indicates that a relatively short supervision intervention can aid clinicians in their clinical encounters with these patients; however, further research is necessary to ascertain the value of the specific phenomenologically based supervision intervention.

Somatization in refugees: a review

PURPOSE

To present a review of the literature concerning medically unexplained physical symptoms in refugees.

METHODS

We outline a variety of definitions and explanations of somatization, as well as the role of culture in the concept of disease. In addition, we present a review of the epidemiological literature about somatization in refugees.

RESULTS

Refugees from non-Western countries exhibit more unexplained somatic symptoms than the general Western population. Although different studies have employed different methodologies and are therefore difficult to compare, it can be concluded that refugees form a particular population in which somatization is prominent.

CONCLUSIONS

Potential, not mutually exclusive, explanations of the high number of somatic symptoms in the refugee population include general psychopathology, specifically traumatisation, results of torture, and stigmatisation of psychiatric care. There are implications for assessment, clinical treatment and further research concerning somatization in refugees.

Management of medically unexplained symptoms: outcomes of a specialist liaison clinic

Aims and method Service utilisation and clinical outcomes of a newly developed specialist primary-secondary care liaison clinic for patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) were evaluated in a cross-sectional and feasibility pilot study. The impact of body-oriented psychological therapy (BOPT) was explored in a small cohort of patients with an identified somatoform disorder.

Results Of 147 consecutive referrals, 113 patients engaged with the assessment process. Of patients with MUS, 42% (n = 45) had a primary diagnosis of somatoform disorder, 36% (n = 38) depressive disorder, and depressive symptoms (even subsyndromal) mediated the effect of somatic symptoms. A marked variation of presenting complaints and service utilisation across ethnic groups was noted. A significant reduction in somatic symptom levels and service utilisation was achieved for patients undergoing BOPT.

Clinical implications A high proportion of patients with MUS have undiagnosed and therefore untreated mental disorders. New and locally derived collaborative care models of active engagement in primary care settings are required. Patients with somatoform disorder may benefit from BOPT; this requires further evaluation in adequately powered clinical trials.

Medically unexplained symptoms: the need for effective communication and an integrated care strategy

Much is already known about medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) in terms of incidence, presentation and current treatment. What needs to be urgently addressed is a strategy for dealing with patients and their conditions, particularly when they do not fall neatly into medical frameworks or pathologies where the syndrome can be easily explained. This article will consider the provision of health and social care support for patients with MUS within an interprofessional education context. The author will contend that a sensitive and valued service for this large client group is dependent upon services without professional boundaries and practitioners with a clinical interest that can work together and agree an appropriate way forward in terms of care, support and strategic service provision. The article will support the idea that clear guidelines through the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence can offer clear clinical direction for practitioners working in primary and secondary care settings to work together interprofessionally to ensure a seamless and sensitive service for people with this condition.

Enhanced care by generalists for functional somatic symptoms and disorders in primary care

BACKGROUND

Patients with medically unexplained or functional somatic symptoms are common in primary care. Previous reviews have reported benefit from specialised interventions such as cognitive behavioural therapy and consultation letters, but there is a need for treatment models which can be applied within the primary care setting. Primary care studies of enhanced care, which includes techniques of reattribution or cognitive behavioural therapy, or both, have shown changes in healthcare professionals' attitudes and behaviour. However, studies of patient outcome have shown variable results and the value of enhanced care on patient outcome remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness of enhanced care interventions for adults with functional somatic symptoms in primary care. The intervention should be delivered by professionals providing first contact care and be compared to treatment as usual. The review focused on patient outcomes only.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group Specialised Register (CCDANCTR-Studies and CCDANCTR-References) (all years to August 2012), together with Ovid searches (to September 2012) on MEDLINE (1950 - ), EMBASE (1980 - ) and PsycINFO (1806 - ). Earlier searches of the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE), CINAHL, PSYNDEX, SIGLE, and LILACS were conducted in April 2010, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in October 2009. No language restrictions were applied. Electronic searches were supplemented by handsearches of relevant conference proceedings (2004 to 2012), reference lists (2011) and contact with authors of included studies and experts in the field (2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We limited our literature search to randomised controlled trials (RCTs), primary care, and adults with functional somatic symptoms. Subsequently we selected studies including all of the following: 1) a trial arm with treatment as usual; 2) an intervention using a structured treatment model which draws on explanations for symptoms in broad bio-psycho-social terms or encourages patients to develop additional strategies for dealing with their physical symptoms, or both; 3) delivery of the intervention by primary care professionals providing first contact care; and 4) assessment of patient outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened identified study abstracts. Disagreements about trial selections were resolved by a third review author. Data from selected publications were independently extracted and risk of bias assessed by two of three authors, avoiding investigators reviewing their own studies. We contacted authors from included studies to obtain missing information. We used continuous outcomes converted to standardised mean differences (SMDs) and based analyses on changes from baseline to follow-up, adjusted for clustering.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies from the literature search, but only six provided sufficient data for analyses. Included studies were European, cluster RCTs with adult participants seeing their usual doctor (in total 233 general practitioners and 1787 participants). Methodological quality was only moderate as studies had no blinding of healthcare professionals and several studies had a risk of recruitment and attrition bias. Studies were heterogeneous with regard to selection of patient populations and intensity of interventions. Outcomes relating to physical or general health (physical symptoms, quality of life) showed substantial heterogeneity between studies (I(2) > 70%) and post hoc analysis suggested that benefit was confined to more intensive interventions; thus we did not calculate a pooled effect. Outcomes relating to mental health showed less heterogeneity and we conducted meta-analyses, which found non-significant overall effect sizes with SMDs for changes at 6 to 24 months follow-up: mental health (3 studies) SMD -0.04 (95% CI -0.18 to 0.10), illness worry (3 studies) SMD 0.09 (95% CI -0.04 to 0.22), depression (4 studies) SMD 0.07 (95% CI -0.05 to 0.20) and anxiety (2 studies) SMD -0.07 (95% CI -0.38 to 0.25). Effects on sick leave could not be estimated. Three studies of patient satisfaction with care all showed positive but non-significant effects, and measures were too heterogeneous to allow meta-analysis. Results on healthcare utilisation were inconclusive. We analysed study discontinuation and found that both short term and long term discontinuation occurred more often in patients allocated to the intervention group, RR of 1.25 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.46) at 12 to 24 months.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence does not answer the question whether enhanced care delivered by front line primary care professionals has an effect or not on the outcome of patients with functional somatic symptoms. Enhanced care may have an effect when delivered per protocol to well-defined groups of patients with functional disorders, but this needs further investigation. Attention should be paid to difficulties including limited consultation time, lack of skills, the need for a degree of diagnostic openness, and patient resistance towards psychosomatic attributions. There is some indication from this and other reviews that more intensive interventions are more successful in changing patient outcomes.

Descriptive and predictive validity of somatic attributions in patients with somatoform disorders: a systematic review of quantitative research

OBJECTIVE

Research on hypochondriasis and other somatoform disorders (SFD) has provided evidence that patients with SFD tend to attribute their symptoms to organic dysfunctions or disease. However, recent studies appear to discredit this. There is no systematic evidence on whether patients with SFD predominantly rely on somatic attributions, despite calls to include somatic attributions as a positive criterion of somatic symptom disorder (SSD) in the upcoming Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5).

METHODS

This study is a systematic review of quantitative studies which assess the descriptive and predictive validity of somatic attribution in SFD. The literature search was restricted to studies with patients who met the DSM-IV criteria for SFD.

RESULTS

Somatic attribution style in SFD has acceptable descriptive but insufficient predictive validity. This confirms that the overlap between somatic and psychological attributions is often substantial. Attribution style can discriminate between SFD patients with and without comorbidity.

CONCLUSION

A somatic attribution style does not qualify as a positive criterion in SSD. However, there is an urgent need for further research on causal illness perceptions in the full spectrum of medically unexplained symptoms in order to confirm this result. Given its high prevalence, research on psychological attribution style is warranted. Re-attribution does not provide a framework sophisticated enough to address the needs of patients in primary care.

Person-centred mental health care: the challenge of implementation

Within mental health care, 'person-centredness' has been generally interpreted to convey a holistic approach with an attitude of respect for the individual and his/her unique experience and needs. Although it has been possible to demonstrate that professionals can acquire such skills through training, the impact on clinical outcomes has been more difficult to demonstrate in randomized controlled trials. Indeed what is becoming increasingly apparent in the literature is the need to acknowledge and address the degree of complexity that exists within the health care system that militates against achieving satisfactory implementation and outcomes from person-centred mental health care. In addressing this, we must develop and work with more sophisticated and three-dimensional models of 'patient-centredness' that engage with not only what happens in the consulting room (the relationship between individual service users and healthcare professionals), but also addresses the problems involved in achieving person-centredness through modifying the way that services and organizations work, and finally by engaging families and communities in the delivery of health care. A truly meaningful concept of 'people-centredness' encompasses how the views of the population are taken into consideration not only in healthcare but also in health and social care policy, and wider society too.

Challenges in the management of patients with medically unexplained symptoms in Poland: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are highly prevalent in primary care. There are no guidelines for treatment and management of this group of patients in the Polish health care system and the establishment of a long-term doctor-patient relationship, which is the crux of the therapy, is impeded.

OBJECTIVE

To establish what challenges Polish GPs encounter while dealing with patients with MUS.

METHOD

A thematic analysis of 4 focus groups (14 GPs altogether), using a three-level coding of data.

RESULTS

Three main themes surfaced in the analysis: negative emotions among the investigated GPs, their insufficient training in the management of patients with MUS and the lack of guidelines and the influence of the changed health care environment on the management of patients with MUS. Four major influences of the changed health care environment emerged: GPs' negative image as professionals, barriers to building a continuous doctor-patient relationship, limited resources and limited access to specialists and lack of a multidisciplinary primary care team.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment and management of patients with MUS should make provision for a personalized approach to the patient within the Polish primary health care system. This can be enhanced by providing additional training in the biopsychosocial model during medical education and establishing a GP multidisciplinary team. Allocating increased financial resources for primary health care and facilitating access to psychologists and psychotherapists could also prove beneficial.

The interpretation of low mood and worry by high users of secondary care with medically unexplained symptoms

BACKGROUND

Around 1% of adults are repeatedly referred from primary to secondary care with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS); many of these patients have depression and anxiety disorders which are unrecognized or inadequately treated. We aimed to investigate the ways patients with MUS and their General Practitioners (GPs) interpret low mood and worry, whether they regard them as depressive or anxiety disorders and how they relate them causally to symptoms.

METHODS

We carried out semi-structured interviews with 27 patients who had been repeatedly referred to specialists for MUS and their GPs and analysed transcripts by qualitative comparison. The analysis examined themes relating to low mood and worry, and their influence on symptoms. It drew on the concept of "otherness", whereby mental phenomena can be located either within the self or as separate entities.

RESULTS

Both patients and GPs acknowledged the presence of low mood and worry. They viewed low mood as either an individual's personal response to circumstances (including their physical symptoms) or as the illness called "depression"; only the latter was amenable to medical intervention. Worry was seen as a trait rather than as a symptom of an anxiety disorder. While low mood and worry were acknowledged to influence physical symptoms, they were considered insufficient to be the main cause by either the patients or their doctors.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with MUS who are high users of secondary care services interpret low mood and worry in ways which allow them to be discussed with professionals, but not as the cause of their physical symptoms.

[Medically unexplained and somatoform complaints and disorders in the elderly: a systematic review of the literature]

OBJECTIVE

To provide a systematic overview of the research concerning the frequency of medically unexplained, somatoform complaints and disorders in the elderly, their risk factors, comorbidity, course, management in primary and secondary care, and psychotherapy.

METHOD

We evaluated 248 clinical and randomized trials, reviews, meta-analyses and practice guidelines for adult samples identified from "PubMed" and "PsycInfo" using the search terms "somatoform" OR "medically unexplained" OR "somatization" OR "somatisation" in combination with other terms for their relevance for the elderly. Other relevant trials were identified from the references from these publications.

RESULTS

Medically unexplained, somatoform complaints and disorders occur in older persons and are more frequent in elderly women than in elderly men. Although many studies found no increased frequency of somatoform complaints in the elderly, based on present research we cannot draw final conclusions concerning the frequency of somatoform disorders and complaints in the elderly, and we cannot give evidence based recommendations for their treatment in primary and secondary care and psychotherapy.

DISCUSSION

This situation results from the special problems encountered in the diagnosis of somatoform complaints and disorders in the elderly, from problems in conceptualisation also found in younger adults, and from the lack of research concerning treatment focussed solely on the old and very old.

Experts' opinions on the management of medically unexplained symptoms in primary care. A qualitative analysis of narrative reviews and scientific editorials

BACKGROUND

The feasibility as well as the suitability of several therapies for medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) in primary care applied by the family physician (FP) appeared to be low. FPs need effective and acceptable strategies to manage these functionally impaired patients.

OBJECTIVE

To review important and effective elements in the treatment of patients with MUS in primary care according to experts in MUS research.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of narrative reviews and scientific editorials in Medline and PsycINFO and triangulated our findings by conducting a focus group with MUS experts.

RESULTS

We included 7 scientific editorials and 23 narrative reviews. According to MUS experts, the most important elements in the treatment of MUS are creating a safe therapeutic environment, generic interventions (such as motivational interviewing, giving tangible explanations, reassurance and regularly scheduled appointments) and specific interventions (such as cognitive approaches and pharmacotherapy). Furthermore, MUS experts indicate that a multi-component approach in which these three important elements are combined are most helpful for patients with MUS. In contrast to most specific interventions, opinions of MUS experts regarding generic interventions and creating a safe therapeutic relationship seem to be more based on theory and experience than on quantitative research.

CONCLUSIONS

MUS experts highlight the importance of generic interventions and doctor-patient communication and relationship. However, studies showing the effectiveness of these elements in the management of MUS in primary care is still scarce. Research as well as medical practice should focus more on these non-specific aspects of the medical consultation.