Recognition of patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms by family physicians: results of a focus group study

Awareness of somatisation disorder among Swedish physicians at emergency departments: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Somatisation is a highly prevalent psychiatric syndrome in both women and men, in which psychological distress is manifested in physical symptoms without a medical explanation. Many patients with somatisation disorder are high healthcare utilisers, particularly at emergency departments. Unnecessary investigations and diagnostic operations occur frequently, which cause both patient suffering and a significant burden on the healthcare system. Emergency department physicians' awareness of somatisation and its manifestations has not previously been studied. This study aimed to investigate awareness about somatisation disorder among physicians working at emergency departments in western Sweden, and to explore differences between gender, specialty, and work experience.

METHODS

A web-based, cross-sectional survey consisting of six dichotomous questions about somatisation disorder was conducted, in December 2021 - January 2022, among licensed physicians of various specialties working at emergency departments in western Sweden. Descriptive analyses and comparative analyses were performed to investigate differences between gender, type of specialty, and years of practice. Data were analysed using chi2 tests and Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Of the 526 eligible physicians who received the survey, 241 responded; response rate 45.8%. The majority of the respondents (56.4%) were women, and most (35.3%) were specialised in obstetrics/gynaecology. Average years of work experience was 11.1 (SD 8.7) years. Although 71% of respondents were aware of the diagnosis, only 7% knew the diagnostic criteria and only 6% had ever diagnosed a patient with somatisation disorder. Female physicians were more aware of underlying factors than their male colleagues (55.7% vs. 38.2%; p = .010). Type of specialty or years of practice did not affect awareness.

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness of somatisation disorder is low among physicians working at emergency departments in western Sweden. The findings suggest a need to increase awareness and knowledge and provide training in diagnosing the condition, to ensure correct decisions and optimal patient management. Clinical guidelines need to be developed to support diagnosis, investigation, and treatment, in Sweden as well as internationally.

Experiences of general practitioners explaining central sensitisation to patients with persistent physical symptoms: a focus group study

OBJECTIVE

Patients with persistent physical symptoms (PPS) require an explanation that is acceptable and comprehensible to them. Central sensitisation (CS) is an explanatory model for PPS and chronic pain that has been broadly applied in the context of pain medicine, but, until recently, not by general practitioners (GPs). We explored how GPs used the CS model in their consultations with patients with PPS.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A qualitative focus group study among GPs in the Netherlands.

METHODS

We instructed 33 GPs on how to explain CS to patients with PPS. After 0.5-1.5 years of using the CS model, 26 GPs participated in focus groups and interviews to report and discuss their experiences with CS as an explanatory model. Audio recordings were transcribed and two researchers independently analysed the data. The text was coded, codes were organised into themes and discussed until consensus was reached.

RESULTS

We identified eleven themes and grouped these into four categories.The GPs regarded the CS model as evidence-based, credible and giving recognition to the patient. On the other hand, they found explaining the CS model difficult and time-consuming. They tailored the CS model to their patients' needs and used multiple consultations to explain the model. The GPs reported that the use of the CS model seemed to improve the understanding and acceptance of the symptoms by the patients and seemed to reduce their need for more diagnostic tests. Furthermore, patients seemed to become more motivated to accept appropriate therapy.

CONCLUSION

GPs reported that they were able to provide explanations with the CS model to their patients with PPS. They regarded the model as evidence-based, credible and giving recognition to the patient, but explaining it difficult and time-consuming.

Medical educators' experiences on medically unexplained symptoms and intercultural communication-an expert focus group study

BACKGROUND

Medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are highly prevalent and remain challenging in healthcare and medical education, along with the increase in the importance of intercultural issues regarding MUS. However, less is known about the challenges of professionally addressing patients with MUS in the interprofessional and intercultural contexts. Thus, the present study aims to provide the first exploration of the experiences of medical specialists regarding treating MUS in intercultural contexts and inputs for training development on the intercultural aspects of MUS.

METHODS

Three focus groups (total n = 13) consisting of medical specialists from a Hungarian university who were teaching at the medical faculty in intercultural settings and also worked for the university health services were interviewed. The topics covered the participants' personal experiences on addressing MUS and the challenges of intercultural communication and the intercultural educational context. Thematic analysis was used to yield a qualitative account of the interviews as guided by the research questions.

RESULTS

Representing the different aspects of medical specialists, the study identified three main themes in the experiences of medical specialists, namely, 1) the need to adapt to the personal world of patients and search for common frames to understand MUS, 2) the need to discover methods for adapting to cultural differences and 3) the need to enhance the interprofessional coordination of knowledge and practices.

CONCLUSIONS

The results are in line with the distinct conclusions of previous studies. Moreover, an integrated educational program on the intercultural aspects of MUS may address the main themes separately and, subsequently, support their integration. Therefore, the study discusses the manner in which an integrated educational program on the intercultural aspects of MUS may address the needs recognized in these aspects.

The careful assessment tool for managing patients with medically unexplained symptoms – The experience of Slovenian family medicine trainees: A qualitative study

Introduction

Primary care physicians use various tools and methods to identify medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). The main purpose of our study is to determine the views of Slovenian family medicine trainees (FMT) about using the “Careful Assessment” tool for managing patients with MUS.

Methods

A qualitative study using open survey questions focused on the experience of family medicine trainees in managing patients with MUS. The sample consisted of surveys from 184 family medicine trainees. These trainees analysed a total of 702 patients with MUS. Manual coding was used for quantitative content analysis.

Results

In the coding process, 49 codes were developed that included broader research fields about using the “Careful Assessment” tool for managing patients with MUS. The codes were grouped into four theoretically grounded, logical categories in accordance with the elaborated theoretical concept: multi-purpose utility; improved patient management; in-depth knowledge and new skills; and patient response.

Conclusion

The study demonstrated that, in the view of Slovenian FMT, the “Careful Assessment” tool has multi-purpose utility. The study showed that FMT felt that this tool helps them in systematic patient management. Their opinion is that it helps them establish a trusting relationship with patients, which is a precondition for providing further treatment.

Unexplained versus explained symptoms: The difference is not in patients' language use. A quantitative analysis of linguistic markers

OBJECTIVE

Patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are believed to have a deviant way of talking about complaints. This study systematically compared linguistic markers in symptom presentations of patients with MUS and medically explained symptoms (MES).

METHODS

This content analysis (cross-sectional study) conceptualized relevant linguistic markers based on previous research about MUS communication. Linguistic markers included negations ("not"), intensifiers ("very"), diminishers ("a little"), first or third person subject ("I" vs. "my body"), subjectivity markers ("I think") and abstraction ("I'm gasping for breath" vs. "I'm short of breath"). We also coded valence, reference to physical or mental states, and consultation phase. We compared 41 MUS and 41 MES transcribed video-recorded general practice consultations. Data were analyzed with binary random intercepts models.

RESULTS

We selected and coded 2752 relevant utterances. Patients with MUS used less diminishers compared to patients with MES, but this main effect disappeared when consultation phase was included as predictor. For all other linguistic variables, the analyses did not reveal any variation in language use based on whether patients had MUS or MES. Importantly, utterances' valence and reference to physical or mental state did predict the use of linguistic markers.

CONCLUSION

We observed no systematic variations in linguistic markers for patients who suffered from MUS compared to MES. Patients varied their language use based on utterances' valence and reference to physical or mental states. Current ideas about deviant patient communication may be based on stigmatized perceptions of how patients with MUS communicate, rather than actual differences in their talk.

Characteristics and economic burden of frequent attenders with medically unexplained symptoms in primary care in Israel

Background

Frequent Attenders with Medically Unexplained Symptoms (FA/MUS) are common in primary care, though challenging to identify and treat.

Objectives

This study sought to compare FA/MUS to FA with organic illnesses (FA/OI) and the general clinic population (Non-FA) to understand their demographic characteristics and healthcare utilisation patterns.

Methods

For this retrospective, observational study, Electronic Medical Records (EMR) were obtained from Clalit Health Services, regarding the population of a sizeable primary care clinic in Be’er-Sheva, Israel. Electronic medical records were screened to identify the top 5% of FA. FA were stratified based on whether they had OI. FA without OI were then corroborated as having MUS by their physicians. Demographics, healthcare utilisation and costs were analysed for FA/OI, FA/MUS and Non-FA.

Results

Out of 594 FA, 305 (53.6%) were FA/OI and 264 (46.4%) were FA/MUS. FA/OI were older (69.1 vs. 56.4 years, p<.001) and costlier (ILS27693 vs. ILS9075, p<.001) than FA/MUS. Average costs for FA/MUS were over four times higher than Non-FA (ILS9075 vs. ILS2035, p<.001). The largest disparities between FA/OI and FA/MUS were in hospitalisations (ILS6998 vs. ILS2033) and surgical procedures (ILS8143 vs. ILS3175). Regarding laboratory tests, differences were smaller between groups of FA but significantly different between FA and Non-FA.

Conclusion

FA/MUS are more costly than Non-FA and exhibit unique healthcare utilisation and costs patterns. FA/OI had more severe illnesses necessitating hospitalisations and surgical interventions, while FA/MUS had more investigations and tests, attempting to find an explanation for their symptoms.

Development and User Experiences of a Biopsychosocial Interprofessional Online Course on Persistent Somatic Symptoms

Background: Communication between healthcare providers and patients with persistent somatic symptoms (PSS) is frequently hampered by mutual misunderstanding and dissatisfaction. Methods: We developed an online, interprofessional course to teach healthcare providers the knowledge, skills, and attitude they need to diagnose and treat PSS in a patient-centered manner based on the biopsychosocial model. The course consisted of six modules of 45-60 min. Each module contained different types of assignments, based on six cases: videos, discussion boards, reading assignments, polls, and quizzes. For this study, we included (1) medical residents, following the course as part of their residency training, and (2) healthcare providers (general practitioners, medical specialists, physiotherapists, nurses, and psychologists), following the course as continuing vocational training. Throughout the course, participants were asked to fill out online surveys, enquiring about their learning gains and satisfaction with the course. Results: The biopsychosocial approach was integrated across the modules and teached health care workers about recent insights on biological, psychological and social aspects of PSS. In total, 801 participants with a wide variety in clinical experience started the course; the largest groups of professionals were general practitioners (N = 400), physiotherapists (N = 124) and mental healthcare workers (N = 53). At the start of the course, 22% of the participants rated their level of knowledge on PSS as adequate. At the end of the course, 359 participants completed the evaluation questionnaires. Of this group, 81% rated their level of knowledge on PSS as adequate and 86% felt that following the course increased their competencies in communicating with patients with PSS (N = 359). On a scale from 1 to 10, participants gave the course a mean grade of 7.8 points. Accordingly, 85% stated that they would recommend the course to a colleague. Conclusion: Our course developed in a co-design process involving multiple stakeholders can be implemented, is being used, and is positively evaluated by professionals across a variety of health care settings.

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.

Medically unexplained symptoms: time to and triggers for diagnosis in primary care consultations

BACKGROUND

It is currently not known when in the consultation GPs label symptoms as medically unexplained and what triggers this.

AIM

To establish the moment in primary care consultations when a GP labels symptoms as medically unexplained and to explore what triggers them to do so.

DESIGN AND SETTING

This was a qualitative study. Data were collected in the Netherlands in 2015.

METHOD

GPs' consultations were video-recorded. GPs stated whether the consultation was about medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). The GP was asked to reflect on the video-recorded consultation and to indicate the moment when they labelled symptoms as MUS. Qualitative interviewing and analysis were performed to explore the triggers GPs perceived that caused them to label the symptoms as MUS.

RESULTS

A total of 43 of the 393 video-recorded consultations (11%) were labelled as MUS. The mean time until GPs labelled symptoms as medically unexplained was about 4 minutes for newly presented symptoms and 2 minutes for symptoms for which the patients had already visited the GP before. GPs were triggered to label symptoms as MUS in the consultation by: the way patients presented their symptoms; the symptoms not fitting into a specific pattern; patients attributing the symptoms to a psychosocial context; and a discrepancy between symptom presentation and objective findings.

CONCLUSION

Most GPs labelled the presented symptoms as medically unexplained soon after the start of the consultation. GPs are triggered to label symptoms as medically unexplained by patients' symptom presentation, symptom patterns, and symptom attribution. This suggests that non-analytical reasoning was a central component in their thought process.

Development of Grip self-help: An online patient-tailored self-help intervention for functional somatic symptoms in primary care

Functional Somatic Symptoms (FSS) are somatic symptoms for which no somatic cause can be identified despite adequate diagnostic testing. FSS are common, costly, and disabling, and treatment options are limited. Psychotherapy is one of few evidence-based treatments for FSS. Yet, this form of therapy is not widely used, since it is usually reserved for severe symptoms, requires a highly trained therapist, and is not well accepted by patients. The current paper describes the development of the online intervention 'Grip self-help' and provides a description of the intervention itself. Grip self-help is an early intervention for mild to moderate FSS in primary care, which aims to reduce somatic symptoms and improve quality of life. In the Grip self-help intervention, patients fill out a set of online questionnaires exploring unhelpful cognitions, emotions, behaviors, and social factors associated with the symptoms. Using this information, a personal profile is generated, identifying factors that might maintain FSS in that individual. As a next step, patients are offered online self-help exercises that are tailored to these factors. Guidance is offered by a primary care professional. The intervention will ultimately result in a personalized self-help guide, composed of texts that are extracted from the exercises patients found useful during the intervention. Grip self-help is the first intervention for FSS combining the concepts of e-health, self-help, and personalized medicine. Guided by a primary care professional, patients are offered an easily accessible, yet highly personalized treatment. Grip self-help thus has the potential to meet the needs of the large group of patients with mild to moderate FSS.

How general practitioners understand and handle medically unexplained symptoms: a focus group study

Background

Medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are a common yet challenging encounter in primary care. The aim of this study was to explore how general practitioners (GPs) understand and handle MUS.

Methods

Three focus group interviews were conducted with a total of 23 GPs. Participants with varied clinical experience were purposively recruited. The data were analysed thematically, using the concept of framing as an analytical lens.

Results

The GPs alternated between a biomedical frame, centred on disease, and a biopsychosocial frame, centred on the sick person. Each frame shaped the GPs’ understanding and handling of MUS. The biomedical frame emphasised the lack of objective evidence, problematized subjective patient testimony, and manifested feelings of uncertainty, doubt and powerlessness. This in turn complicated patient handling. In contrast, the biopsychosocial frame emphasised clinical experience, turned patient testimony into a valuable source of information, and manifested feelings of confidence and competence. This in turn made them feel empowered. The GPs with the least experience relied more on the biomedical frame, whereas their more seasoned seniors relied mostly on the biopsychosocial frame.

Conclusion

The biopsychosocial frame helps GPs to understand and handle MUS better than the biomedical frame does. Medical students should spend more time learning biopsychosocial medicine, and to integrate the clinical knowledge of their peers with their own.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-018-0745-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Is uncertain vulvovaginal candidiasis a marker of vulvodynia? A study in a Dutch general practice research database

Background

A recent Dutch study in general practice showed a clear relationship between the diagnosis of vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) and symptoms suggestive of provoked vulvodynia (PVD). PVD accounts for the largest group of vulvar pains, but is often not recognised by GPs.

Aim

To investigate whether diagnostic uncertainty about VVC in general practice could also point to the diagnosis of PVD, and whether and how this diagnostic uncertainty affects management.

Design & setting

An observational study in 2014 in Dutch general practices of the NIVEL Primary Care Database.

Method

Women with an uncertain diagnosis of VVC were distinguished from those with certain VVC based on the occurrence of recurrent episodes and persisting complaints, despite treatment. Factors known to be associated with PVD were hypothesised to be more prevalent in women with uncertain VVC. Data on symptom management by GPs were collected.

Results

In total 7066 women with VVC or uncertain VVC were included. Uncertain VVC was found to account for 28% of these patients. Compared to VVC, the group uncertain VVC included significantly more women with female genital symptoms, tiredness, irritable bowel syndrome (all P<0.001), feeling anxious, reduced sexual desire, depressive disorder, relationship problems, and micturition symptoms (all P<0.05). Compared to VVC, the group uncertain VVC included significantly higher mean numbers of telephone consultations (P<0.001), more referrals to gynaecology (P = 0.009), and higher mean numbers of prescriptions per patient (P<0.001).

Conclusion

This study's findings indicate that uncertain VVC could be a marker of PVD. GPs might reconsider their diagnostics and management when women present recurrent and persistent vulvovaginal complaints, especially if accompanied by dyspareunia, functional syndromes, micturition symptoms, and psychological conditions.