1
|
Mamo N, van de Klundert M, Tak L, Hartman TO, Hanssen D, Rosmalen J. Characteristics of collaborative care networks in functional disorders: A systematic review. J Psychosom Res 2023; 172:111357. [PMID: 37392482 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2023.111357] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2023] [Revised: 04/28/2023] [Accepted: 05/04/2023] [Indexed: 07/03/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Functional disorders (FD) are complex conditions, for which multidisciplinary involvement is often recommended. Collaborative care networks (CCN) may unlock the potential of the multidisciplinary team (MDT) in FD care. To understand what characteristics should be part of CCNs in FD, we studied the composition and characteristics of existing CCNs in FD. METHODS We performed a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines. A search of PubMed, WebofScience, PsycInfo, SocINDEX, AMED and CINAHL was undertaken to select studies describing CCNs in FD. Two reviewers extracted characteristics of the different CCNs. Characteristics were classified as relating to structure and processes of networks. RESULTS A total of 62 studies were identified representing 39 CCNs across 11 countries. Regarding structural characteristics, we found that most networks are outpatient, secondary-care based, with teams of between two and 19 members. Medical specialists were most commonly involved and the typical team leads as well as main patient contacts were general practitioners (GPs) or nurses. Regarding processes, collaboration was demonstrated mostly during assessment, management and patient education, less often during rehabilitation and follow-up, mostly using MDT meetings. CCNs provided a wide range of treatment modalities, reflecting a biopsychosocial approach, including psychological therapies, physiotherapy and social and occupational therapy. CONCLUSION CCNs for FD are heterogeneous, showing a wide variety of structures as well as processes. The heterogeneity of results provides a broad framework, demonstrating considerable variation in how this framework is applied in different contexts. Better development of network evaluation, as well as professional collaboration and education processes is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nick Mamo
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Psychiatry, Groningen, Netherlands; Dimence Institute for Specialized Mental Health Care, Alkura Specialist Center Persistent Somatic Symptoms, Deventer, Netherlands.
| | - Manouk van de Klundert
- Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Lineke Tak
- Dimence Institute for Specialized Mental Health Care, Alkura Specialist Center Persistent Somatic Symptoms, Deventer, Netherlands
| | - Tim Olde Hartman
- Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud Institute of Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Denise Hanssen
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Psychiatry, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Judith Rosmalen
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Psychiatry, Groningen, Netherlands; Dimence Institute for Specialized Mental Health Care, Alkura Specialist Center Persistent Somatic Symptoms, Deventer, Netherlands; University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Internal Medicine, Groningen, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Leaviss J, Davis S, Ren S, Hamilton J, Scope A, Booth A, Sutton A, Parry G, Buszewicz M, Moss-Morris R, White P. Behavioural modification interventions for medically unexplained symptoms in primary care: systematic reviews and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2020; 24:1-490. [PMID: 32975190 PMCID: PMC7548871 DOI: 10.3310/hta24460] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna Leaviss
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Sarah Davis
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Shijie Ren
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Jean Hamilton
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Alison Scope
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Andrew Booth
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Anthea Sutton
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Glenys Parry
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Marta Buszewicz
- Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London Medical School, London, UK
| | | | - Peter White
- Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ganslev CA, Storebø OJ, Callesen HE, Ruddy R, Søgaard U. Psychosocial interventions for conversion and dissociative disorders in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 7:CD005331. [PMID: 32681745 PMCID: PMC7388313 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd005331.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Conversion and dissociative disorders are conditions where people experience unusual neurological symptoms or changes in awareness or identity. However, symptoms and clinical signs cannot be explained by a neurological disease or other medical condition. Instead, a psychological stressor or trauma is often present. The symptoms are real and can cause significant distress or problems with functioning in everyday life for the people experiencing them. OBJECTIVES To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of psychosocial interventions of conversion and dissociative disorders in adults. SEARCH METHODS We conducted database searches between 16 July and 16 August 2019. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and eight other databases, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials that compared psychosocial interventions for conversion and dissociative disorders with standard care, wait list or other interventions (pharmaceutical, somatic or psychosocial). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We selected, quality assessed and extracted data from the identified studies. Two review authors independently performed all tasks. We used standard Cochrane methodology. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD) and standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI. We assessed and downgraded the evidence according to the GRADE system for risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness, inconsistency and publication bias. MAIN RESULTS We included 17 studies (16 with parallel-group designs and one with a cross-over design), with 894 participants aged 18 to 80 years (female:male ratio 3:1). The data were separated into 12 comparisons based on the different interventions and comparators. Studies were pooled into the same comparison when identical interventions and comparisons were evaluated. The certainty of the evidence was downgraded as a consequence of potential risk of bias, as many of the studies had unclear or inadequate allocation concealment. Further downgrading was performed due to imprecision, few participants and inconsistency. There were 12 comparisons for the primary outcome of reduction in physical signs. Inpatient paradoxical intention therapy compared with outpatient diazepam: inpatient paradoxical intention therapy did not reduce conversive symptoms compared with outpatient diazepam at the end of treatment (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.28; 1 study, 30 participants; P = 0.12; very low-quality evidence). Inpatient treatment programme plus hypnosis compared with inpatient treatment programme: inpatient treatment programme plus hypnosis did not reduce severity of impairment compared with inpatient treatment programme at the end of treatment (MD -0.49 (negative value better), 95% CI -1.28 to 0.30; 1 study, 45 participants; P = 0.23; very low-quality evidence). Outpatient hypnosis compared with wait list: outpatient hypnosis might reduce severity of impairment compared with wait list at the end of treatment (MD 2.10 (higher value better), 95% CI 1.34 to 2.86; 1 study, 49 participants; P < 0.00001; low-quality evidence). Behavioural therapy plus routine clinical care compared with routine clinical care: behavioural therapy plus routine clinical care might reduce the number of weekly seizures compared with routine clinical care alone at the end of treatment (MD -21.40 (negative value better), 95% CI -27.88 to -14.92; 1 study, 18 participants; P < 0.00001; very low-quality evidence). Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) compared with standard medical care: CBT did not reduce monthly seizure frequency compared to standard medical care at end of treatment (RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.39 to 6.19; 1 study, 16 participants; P = 0.53; very low-quality evidence). CBT did not reduce physical signs compared to standard medical care at the end of treatment (MD -4.75 (negative value better), 95% CI -18.73 to 9.23; 1 study, 61 participants; P = 0.51; low-quality evidence). CBT did not reduce seizure freedom compared to standard medical care at end of treatment (RR 2.33, 95% CI 0.30 to 17.88; 1 trial, 16 participants; P = 0.41; very low-quality evidence). Psychoeducational follow-up programmes compared with treatment as usual (TAU): no study measured reduction in physical signs at end of treatment. Specialised CBT-based physiotherapy inpatient programme compared with wait list: no study measured reduction in physical signs at end of treatment. Specialised CBT-based physiotherapy outpatient intervention compared with TAU: no study measured reduction in physical signs at end of treatment. Brief psychotherapeutic intervention (psychodynamic interpersonal treatment approach) compared with standard care: brief psychotherapeutic interventions did not reduce conversion symptoms compared to standard care at end of treatment (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.00; 1 study, 19 participants; P = 0.14; very low-quality evidence). CBT plus adjunctive physical activity (APA) compared with CBT alone: CBT plus APA did not reduce overall physical impacts compared to CBT alone at end of treatment (MD 5.60 (negative value better), 95% CI -15.48 to 26.68; 1 study, 21 participants; P = 0.60; very low-quality evidence). Hypnosis compared to diazepam: hypnosis did not reduce symptoms compared to diazepam at end of treatment (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.24; 1 study, 40 participants; P = 0.22; very low-quality evidence). Outpatient motivational interviewing (MI) and mindfulness-based psychotherapy compared with psychotherapy alone: psychotherapy preceded by MI might decrease seizure frequency compared with psychotherapy alone at end of treatment (MD 41.40 (negative value better), 95% CI 4.92 to 77.88; 1 study, 54 participants; P = 0.03; very low-quality evidence). The effect on the secondary outcomes was reported in 16/17 studies. None of the studies reported results on adverse effects. In the studies reporting on level of functioning and quality of life at end of treatment the effects ranged from small to no effect. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The results of the meta-analysis and reporting of single studies suggest there is lack of evidence regarding the effects of any psychosocial intervention on conversion and dissociative disorders in adults. It is not possible to draw any conclusions about potential benefits or harms from the included studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christina A Ganslev
- Clinic of Liaison Psychiatry, Region Zealand, Denmark
- Psychiatric Research Unit, Psychiatry of Region Zealand, Slagelse, Denmark
| | - Ole Jakob Storebø
- Psychiatric Research Unit, Psychiatry of Region Zealand, Slagelse, Denmark
- Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Department, Region Zealand, Roskilde, Denmark
- Department of Psychology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | | | | | - Ulf Søgaard
- Clinic of Liaison Psychiatry, Region Zealand, Denmark
- Psychiatric Research Unit, Psychiatry of Region Zealand, Slagelse, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
van Dijk SDM, Hanssen D, Naarding P, Lucassen P, Comijs H, Oude Voshaar R. Big Five personality traits and medically unexplained symptoms in later life. Eur Psychiatry 2016; 38:23-30. [PMID: 27611331 DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/06/2016] [Revised: 04/24/2016] [Accepted: 05/02/2016] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S D M van Dijk
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Interdisciplinary Center for Psychopathology of Emotion regulation (ICPE), PO box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - D Hanssen
- Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Department of Psychiatry & Research Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - P Naarding
- Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Department of Psychiatry & Research Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; Department of Old Age Psychiatry, GGNet, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands
| | - P Lucassen
- Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Department of Primary and Community Care, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - H Comijs
- GGZinGeest & Department Psychiatry, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R Oude Voshaar
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Interdisciplinary Center for Psychopathology of Emotion regulation (ICPE), PO box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Fridlund B, Andersson EK, Bala SV, Dahlman GB, Ekwall AK, Glasdam S, Hommel A, Lindberg C, Persson EI, Rantala A, Sjöström-Strand A, Wihlborg J, Samuelson K. Essentials of Teamcare in Randomized Controlled Trials of Multidisciplinary or Interdisciplinary Interventions in Somatic Care: A Systematic Review. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2015. [DOI: 10.4236/ojn.2015.512116] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
|
6
|
Rosendal M, Blankenstein AH, Morriss R, Fink P, Sharpe M, Burton C. Enhanced care by generalists for functional somatic symptoms and disorders in primary care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013:CD008142. [PMID: 24142886 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008142.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marianne Rosendal
- Research Unit for General Practice, Institute of Public Health, Aarhus University, Bartholins Alle 2, Århus, Denmark, DK-8000
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Hilderink P, Collard R, Rosmalen J, Oude Voshaar R. Prevalence of somatoform disorders and medically unexplained symptoms in old age populations in comparison with younger age groups: a systematic review. Ageing Res Rev 2013; 12:151-6. [PMID: 22575906 DOI: 10.1016/j.arr.2012.04.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 82] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/29/2012] [Revised: 04/09/2012] [Accepted: 04/23/2012] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To review current knowledge regarding the prevalence of somatization problems in later life by level of caseness (somatoform disorders and medically unexplained symptoms, MUS) and to compare these rates with those in middle-aged and younger age groups. METHOD A systematic search of the literature published from 1966 onwards was conducted in the Pubmed and EMBASE databases. RESULTS Overall 8 articles, describing a total of 7 cohorts, provided data of at least one prevalence rate for somatoform disorders or MUS for the middle-aged (50-65 years) or older age (≥65 years) group. Prevalence rates for somatoform disorders in the general population range from 11 to 21% in younger, 10 to 20% in the middle-aged, and 1.5 to 13% in the older age groups. Prevalence rates for MUS show wider ranges, of respectively 1.6-70%, 2.4-87%, and 4.6-18%, in the younger, middle, and older age groups, which could be explained by the use of different instruments as well as lack of consensus in defining MUS. CONCLUSION Somatoform disorders and MUS are common in later life, although the available data suggest that prevalence rates decline after the age of 65 years. More systematic research with special focus on the older population is needed to understand this age-related decline in prevalence rates.
Collapse
|
8
|
Suter E, Deutschlander S, Mickelson G, Nurani Z, Lait J, Harrison L, Jarvis-Selinger S, Bainbridge L, Achilles S, Ateah C, Ho K, Grymonpre R. Can interprofessional collaboration provide health human resources solutions? A knowledge synthesis. J Interprof Care 2012; 26:261-8. [DOI: 10.3109/13561820.2012.663014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
|
9
|
Nowak DA, Fink GR. Psychogenic movement disorders: aetiology, phenomenology, neuroanatomical correlates and therapeutic approaches. Neuroimage 2009; 47:1015-25. [PMID: 19426818 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.04.082] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2009] [Revised: 04/26/2009] [Accepted: 04/28/2009] [Indexed: 10/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Paralysis and movement disorders unexplained by identifiable neurological disease are common clinical presentations in neurological outpatient clinics. Despite their frequency and potential importance from a neuroscientific viewpoint these disorders have received surprisingly little attention in clinically oriented neuroscientific research. In this review we summarize the available literature that specifically relates to the functional neuroanatomy of psychogenic movement disorders. We discuss the aetiology, clinical phenomenology, the current concepts of the dynamic neuroanatomical networks underlying psychogenic neurological syndromes as elucidated by neuroimaging and their potential implications for novel therapeutic approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dennis A Nowak
- Department of Neurology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
| | | |
Collapse
|