Hypochondriacal concerns and attitudes toward illness in males and females

Discrepancy between self-assessed hearing status and measured audiometric evaluation

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the difference between self-reported hearing status and hearing impairment assessed using conventional audiometry. The associated factors were examined when a concordance between self-reported hearing and audiometric measures was lacking.

METHODS

In total, 19,642 individuals ≥20 years of age who participated in the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys conducted from 2009 through 2012 were enrolled. Pure-tone hearing threshold audiometry (PTA) was measured and classified into three levels: <25 dB (normal hearing); ≥25 dB <40 dB (mild hearing impairment); and ≥40 dB (moderate-to-severe hearing impairment). The self-reported hearing loss was categorized into 3 categories. The participants were categorized into three groups: the concordance (matched between self-reported hearing loss and audiometric PTA), overestimation (higher self-reported hearing loss compared to audiometric PTA), and underestimation groups (lower self-reported hearing loss compared to audiometric PTA). The associations of age, sex, education level, stress level, anxiety/depression, tympanic membrane (TM) status, hearing aid use, and tinnitus with the discrepancy between the hearing self-reported hearing loss and audiometric pure tone threshold results were analyzed using multinomial logistic regression analysis with complex sampling.

RESULTS

Overall, 80.1%, 7.1%, and 12.8% of the participants were assigned to the concordance, overestimation, and underestimation groups, respectively. Older age (adjusted odds ratios [AORs] = 1.28 [95% confidence interval = 1.19-1.37] and 2.80 [2.62-2.99] for the overestimation and the underestimation groups, respectively), abnormal TM (2.17 [1.46-3.23] and 1.59 [1.17-2.15]), and tinnitus (2.44 [2.10-2.83] and 1.61 [1.38-1.87]) were positively correlated with both the overestimation and underestimation groups. Compared with specialized workers, service workers, manual workers, and the unemployed were more likely to be in the overestimation group (1.48 [1.11-1.98], 1.39 [1.04-1.86], and 1.50 [1.18-1.90], respectively), and service workers were more likely to be in the underestimation group (AOR = 1.42 [1.01-1.99]). Higher education level (0.77 [0.59-1.01] and 0.43 [0.33-0.57]) and hearing aid use (0.36 [0.17-0.77] and 0.23 [0.13-0.43]) were negatively associated with being in the underestimation group (0.43 [0.37-0.50]). Compared with males, females were less likely to be assigned to the underestimation group (0.43 [0.37-0.50]). Stress (1.98 [1.32-2.98]) and anxiety/depression (1.30 [1.06-1.59]) were associated with overestimation group.

CONCLUSION

Older age, lower education level, occupation, abnormal TM, non-hearing aid use, and tinnitus were related to both overestimation and underestimation groups. Male gender was related to underestimation, and stress and anxiety/depression were correlated with overestimation group. An understanding of these factors associated with the self-reported hearing loss will be instrumental to identifying and managing hearing-impaired individuals.

The development and validation of a Chinese version of the Illness Attitude Scales: an investigation of university students

BACKGROUND

The Illness Attitude Scales (IAS) are considered as one of the most suitable instruments to screen hypochondriasis.

PURPOSE

Whether it has cross-cultural validity in China remains to be determined.

METHODS

In Chinese university students (141 women and 141 men), we have administered the IAS, the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ), and the Plutchik-van Praag Depression Inventory (PVP).

RESULTS

For the first time in Chinese culture, we have identified a four-factor structure of the IAS: patho-thanatophobia, symptom effect, treatment seeking, and hypochondriacal belief. Women scored significantly higher on IAS patho-thanatophobia and treatment seeking, on ZKPQ neuroticism-anxiety and activity, and on PVP than men did. The neuroticism-anxiety was significantly correlated with patho-thanatophobia and symptom effect, and PVP was positively correlated with symptom effect in women. Neuroticism-anxiety was significantly correlated with patho-thanatophobia, and impulsive sensation seeking and activity were significantly correlated with symptom effect in men.

CONCLUSION

In Chinese students, we have found a stable four-factor IAS structure.

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

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

Specific phobia of illness: search for a new subtype

Specific phobia of illness makes its appearance in DSM-IV as a new diagnostic subtype, separate from hypochondriasis. A review of the literature indicates that, while there is some support for this new category, studies have not as yet been done that could provide validation. Illness phobia appears to be a significant problem; it is prevalent in the general population and is associated with distress and impairment, including interference with medical care. It appears to be associated with older age, physical illness, and female gender. Group comparisons are needed showing that persons with this phobia can be distinguished from hypochondriasis on the basis of these and other demographic and illness features. We outline a research agenda for demonstrating this separation.

Gender differences in the psychopathology of depressed inpatients

In the last few years there has been increased scientific effort to describe the gender-specific psychopathological features of depression. Until now these studies have not been entirely conclusive, which could be the result of methodological difficulties. This report investigates sex differences in the symptom presentation in an inpatient population: 104 female and 113 male patients suffering from a depressive episode according to ICD-10 were admitted to the inpatient treatment at the Department of General Psychiatry in Vienna. A psychopathological rating according to the standardized documentation system of the AMDP (Association for Methodology and Documentation in Psychiatry) was performed at admission and discharge. At admission into the hospital women tended to show more affective lability (p = 0.025), whereas men had higher scores in affective rigidity (p = 0.032), blunted affect (p = 0.002), decreased libido (p = 0.028), hypochondriasis (p = 0.016) and hypochondriac delusions (p = 0.039). At discharge from the hospital women had significantly higher scores in dysphoria (p = 0.010), while men were more prone to have compulsive impulses (p = 0.030). Although our results were obtained in a selected sample of inpatients at a university hospital, they are indicative of psychopathological differences between men and women in the core symptoms of depression. These differences may influence diagnostic practice and gender specific treatment of depression.

Somatic symptom reporting in women and men

Women report more intense, more numerous, and more frequent bodily symptoms than men. This difference appears in samples of medical patients and in community samples, whether or not gynecologic and reproductive symptoms are excluded, and whether all bodily symptoms or only those which are medically unexplained are examined. More limited, but suggestive, literature on experimental pain, symptom reporting in childhood, and pain thresholds in animals are compatible with these findings in adults. A number of contributory factors have been implicated, supported by varying degrees of evidence. These include innate differences in somatic and visceral perception; differences in symptom labeling, description, and reporting; the socialization process, which leads to differences in the readiness to acknowledge and disclose discomfort; a sex differential in the incidence of abuse and violence; sex differences in the prevalence of anxiety and depressive disorders; and gender bias in research and in clinical practice. General internists need to keep these factors in mind in obtaining the clinical history, understanding the meaning and significance that symptoms hold for each patient, and providing symptom relief.

Somatic symptom reporting in women and men

Women report more intense, more numerous, and more frequent bodily symptoms than men. This difference appears in samples of medical patients and in community samples, whether or not gynecologic and reproductive symptoms are excluded, and whether all bodily symptoms or only those which are medically unexplained are examined. More limited, but suggestive, literature on experimental pain, symptom reporting in childhood, and pain thresholds in animals are compatible with these findings in adults. A number of contributory factors have been implicated, supported by varying degrees of evidence. These include innate differences in somatic and visceral perception; differences in symptom labeling, description, and reporting; the socialization process, which leads to differences in the readiness to acknowledge and disclose discomfort; a sex differential in the incidence of abuse and violence; sex differences in the prevalence of anxiety and depressive disorders; and gender bias in research and in clinical practice. General internists need to keep these factors in mind in obtaining the clinical history, understanding the meaning and significance that symptoms hold for each patient, and providing symptom relief.

The Illness Attitude Scales in chest pain patients: a study of psychometric properties

The main aim of the study was to assess the factorial structure of the Illness Attitude Scales (IAS). The study population comprised 199 patients referred to cardiological out-patient investigation because of chest pain. The factor analysis revealed three factors of the IAS. Accordingly, we found three subscales, interpreted as health anxiety (HA), illness behavior (IB), and health habits (HH). The internal consistency of the subscales, measured by Cronbach's alpha coefficient, were 0.92, 0.80, and 0.49, respectively. The HA and IB scores were significantly intercorrelated (r = 0.39, p < 0.001), but HH was not significantly correlated with either HA or IB. The HA and IB subscales discriminated between patients with and without panic disorder. The results support previous findings, namely that the IAS comprise two subscales with psychometrically sound properties. Correlational analysis indicated validity of the two subscales. Further studies are needed to confirm the validity.