Maternal anxiety and previous anaphylaxis are associated with alexithymia in young patients with food allergy

BACKGROUND

Alexithymia is a multifaceted personality construct described as "a lack of words to express emotions" that includes difficulty identifying feelings, difficulty describing feelings and a concrete, externally oriented cognitive style. Among patients with food allergy (FA) alexithymia has been found higher than in general population and associated with dysfunctional coping strategies. Childhood traumatic experiences and/or dysfunctional parent-child relationship can contribute to alexithymia. The study aimed to explore possible associations between child alexithymia and mother alexithymia and anxiety, as well as previous anaphylaxis.

METHODS

Sixty-five mother-child pairs have been recruited. Children had a medical diagnosis of FA. The Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 was used to assess alexithymia in participants. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory was used to assess trait anxiety in mothers. Statistical analysis was performed to investigate the influence of variables sex, previous anaphylaxis, and adrenaline auto-injector prescription on child and mother's alexithymia and to explore possible association between maternal and child alexithymia.

RESULTS

A substantial percentage of children were alexithymic (21.5%) or borderline (33.8%), while mothers' frequencies were lower and in line with prevalence in general population. Child alexithymia was positively associated with previous anaphylaxis and mothers' trait anxiety (p < .05). Mother trait anxiety was also associated with maternal alexithymia. Furthermore, a positive association between child and mother alexithymia has been found.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians must be aware of the role of alexithymia and its association with maternal anxiety and previous anaphylaxis in children with FA, encouraging seeking psychological support when needed. A multidisciplinary patient-centered approach should be put in place for the effective care of FA.

Personality and Cognitive-Emotional Variables in Spanish Children and Adolescents With and Without Cleft Lip and/or Palate

OBJECTIVES

To analyze personality (Big Five Model) and cognitive-emotional variables in children and adolescents with a cleft lip/palate (s) in comparison to an equivalent peer sample without an orofacial cleft.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study with data collected using self-reported questionnaires over 2 years.

SETTING

Data were collected during visits to health center dental clinics.

PATIENTS

Children and adolescents (aged 8-18 years) with nonsyndromic CL/P (n = 60) and without a cleft (n = 60).

METHOD

Patients completed questionnaires with assistance as needed from a member of the research team.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Children's Perceived Self-Efficacy, Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (child version), Big Five Questionnaire for Children, and Alexithymia Questionnaire for Children.

RESULTS

When accounting for age, children with CL/P had normative self-efficacy and cognitive-emotional regulation strategies, with the protective factor of significantly lower rumination than peers. Children with CL/P were significantly lower on the Big Five personality areas of conscientiousness, openness to experience, extraversion, and agreeableness along with significantly higher neuroticism. They were similarly significantly higher than peers for alexithymia.

CONCLUSION

Children with CL/P showed strengths in self-efficacy typical of peers and less use of some maladaptive coping strategies; however, they also had higher levels of alexithymia and risk factors associated with the Big Five Model of personality. Strategies may be clinically useful that maximize areas of strength to support children with CL/P in expressing their emotions to reduce alexithymia, coping with of negative affect, and building assertiveness.

Why Do People Misdiagnose Themselves with Food Hypersensitivity? An Exploration of the Role of Biopsychosocial Factors

Up to 35% of people self-diagnose food allergy or intolerance (food hypersensitivity [FH]), or diagnose it in their child, and self-manage the condition rather than seek a clinical diagnosis. This is much higher than the latest FH prevalence rate, estimated to affect 2–5% of the general population. The actual prevalence rate may be underestimated due to the lack of diagnostic services; however, this can only account for a small proportion of the discrepancy because only a small percentage of self-reported FH can be clinically confirmed. Many people are therefore misdiagnosing their or their child’s symptoms as FH and needlessly removing foods from their or their child’s diet. There are a number of possible reasons for this misdiagnosis, which can be considered from a biopsychosocial perspective. Psychological factors include a confusion over the diagnosis, coincidental pairing of food and symptom, psychological or psychosomatic reactions, and taste aversions. There are also biological mechanisms that have not been fully considered in food allergy research that may be relevant, such as conditioning of the immune system or stress responses. A social context pertains to a greater awareness of FH due to media coverage and changes in food labelling laws. Any of these theories are plausible, but the research to date has a number of methodological issues. Most studies report on small self-selected samples recruited from clinics and there is a lack of general population data. Studies also tend to be cross-sectional, which does not allow cause and effect to be established. Future research needs to include longitudinal designs that incorporate qualitative elements to enable a detailed exploration of reasons why people self and misdiagnose FH.

Why Do People Misdiagnose Themselves with Food Hypersensitivity? An Exploration of the Role of Biopsychosocial Factors

Up to 35% of people self-diagnose food allergy or intolerance (food hypersensitivity [FH]), or diagnose it in their child, and self-manage the condition rather than seek a clinical diagnosis. This is much higher than the latest FH prevalence rate, estimated to affect 2–5% of the general population. The actual prevalence rate may be underestimated due to the lack of diagnostic services; however, this can only account for a small proportion of the discrepancy because only a small percentage of self-reported FH can be clinically confirmed. Many people are therefore misdiagnosing their or their child’s symptoms as FH and needlessly removing foods from their or their child’s diet. There are a number of possible reasons for this misdiagnosis, which can be considered from a biopsychosocial perspective. Psychological factors include a confusion over the diagnosis, coincidental pairing of food and symptom, psychological or psychosomatic reactions, and taste aversions. There are also biological mechanisms that have not been fully considered in food allergy research that may be relevant, such as conditioning of the immune system or stress responses. A social context pertains to a greater awareness of FH due to media coverage and changes in food labelling laws. Any of these theories are plausible, but the research to date has a number of methodological issues. Most studies report on small self-selected samples recruited from clinics and there is a lack of general population data. Studies also tend to be cross-sectional, which does not allow cause and effect to be established. Future research needs to include longitudinal designs that incorporate qualitative elements to enable a detailed exploration of reasons why people self and misdiagnose FH.