This is the first prospective study to examine, and show, a relationship between onset of clinically significant physical symptoms and greater healthcare utilization. Our data suggest that patients with increasing physical symptom burden have the same level of healthcare as patients with chronic physical symptom burden. Needed next steps are to better understand the quality of care at inception and determine how to intervene so that recommended approaches to care are provided from the onset.
One interpretation of re-experiencing symptoms in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is that memories related to emotional information are stored strongly, but with insufficient specificity, so that stimuli which are minimally related to the traumatic event are sufficient to trigger recall. If so, re-experiencing symptoms may reflect a general bias against encoding background information during a learning experience, and this tendency might not be limited to learning about traumatic or even autobiographical events. To test this possibility, we administered a discrimination-and-transfer task to 60 Veterans (11.2% female, mean age 54.0 years) self-assessed for PTSD symptoms in order to examine whether re-experiencing symptoms were associated with increased generalization following associative learning. The discrimination task involved learning to choose the rewarded object from each of six object pairs; each pair differed in colour or shape but not both. In the transfer phase, the irrelevant feature in each pair was altered. Regression analysis revealed no relationships between re-experiencing symptoms and initial discrimination learning. However, re-experiencing symptom scores contributed to the prediction of transfer performance. Other PTSD symptom clusters (avoidance/numbing, hyperarousal) did not account for significant additional variance. The results are consistent with an emerging interpretation of re-experiencing symptoms as reflecting a learning bias that favours generalization at the expense of specificity. Future studies will be needed to determine whether this learning bias may pre-date and confer risk for, re-experiencing symptoms in individuals subsequently exposed to trauma, or emerges only in the wake of trauma exposure and PTSD symptom development.
BackgroundCommunication between patients and providers about persistent “medically unexplained” physical symptoms (MUS) is characterized by discordance. While the difficulties are well documented, few studies have examined effective communication. We sought to determine what veterans with Gulf War Illness (GWI) perceive as the most helpful communication from their providers. Veterans with GWI, a type of MUS, have historically had complex relationships with medical providers. Determining effective communication for patients with particularly complex relationships may help identify the most critical communication elements for all patients with MUS.MethodsTwo hundred and-ten veterans with GWI were asked, in a written questionnaire, what was the most useful thing a medical provider had told them about their GWI. Responses were coded into three categories with 10 codes.ResultsThe most prevalent helpful communication reported by patients was when the provider offered acknowledgement and validation (N = 70). Specific recommendations for managing GWI or its symptoms (N = 48) were also commonly reported to be helpful. In contrast, about a third of the responses indicated that nothing about the communication was helpful (N = 63). There were not differences in severity of symptoms, disability or healthcare utilization between patients who found acknowledgement and validation, specific recommendations or nothing helpful.ConclusionsPrevious research has documented the discord between patients and providers regarding MUS. This study suggests that most patients are able to identify something helpful a provider has said, particularly acknowledgement and validation and specific treatment recommendations. The findings also highlight missed communication opportunities with a third of patients not finding anything helpful.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.