A thorough, simultaneous biopsychosocial diagnostic assessment enables the early recognition of non-specific, functional, and somatoform bodily complaints. The appropriate treatment depends on the severity of the condition. Effective treatment requires the patient's active cooperation and the collaboration of all treating health professionals under the overall management of the patient's primary-care physician.

No abstract

Objective: To review cost-of-illness studies (COI) and economic evaluations (EE) conducted for medically unexplained symptoms and to analyze their methods and results. Methods: We searched the databases PubMed, PsycINFO and National Health Service Economic Evaluations Database of the University of York. Cost data were inflated to 2006 using country-specific gross domestic product inflators and converted to 2006 USD purchasing power parities. Results: We identified 5 COI and 8 EE, of which 6 were cost-minimization analyses and 2 were cost-effectiveness analyses. All studies used patient level data collected between 1980 and 2004 and were predominantly conducted in the USA (n = 10). COI found annual excess health care costs of somatizing patients between 432 and 5,353 USD in 2006 values. Indirect costs were estimated by only one EE and added up to about 18,000 USD per year. In EE, educational interventions for physicians as well as cognitive-behavioral therapy approaches for patients were evaluated. For both types of interventions, effectiveness was either shown within EE or by previous studies. Most EE found (often insignificant) cost reductions resulting from the interventions, but only two studies explicitly combined changes in costs with data on effectiveness to cost-effectiveness ratios (ratio of additional costs to additional effects). Conclusions: Medically unexplained symptoms cause relevant annual excess costs in health care that are comparable to mental health problems like depression or anxiety disorders and which may be reduced by interventions targeting physicians as well as patients. More extensive research on indirect costs and cost-effectiveness is needed.

Background: Patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are frequent in primary care and substantially impaired in their quality of life (QoL). Specific training of general practitioners (GPs) alone did not demonstrate sustained improvement at later follow-up in current reviews. We evaluated a collaborative group intervention. Methods: We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial. Thirty-five GPs recruited 304 MUS patients (intervention group: 170; control group: 134). All GPs were trained in diagnosis and management of MUS (control condition). Eighteen randomly selected intervention GPs participated in training for a specific collaborative group intervention. They conducted 10 weekly group sessions and 2 booster meetings in their practices, together with a psychosomatic specialist. Six and 12 months after baseline, QoL was assessed with the Short-Form 36. The primary outcome was the physical composite score (PCS), and the secondary outcome was the mental composite score (MCS). Results: At 12 months, intention-to-treat analyses showed a significant between-group effect for the MCS (p = 0.023) but not for the PCS (p = 0.674). This effect was preceded by a significant reduction of somatic symptom severity (15-item somatic symptom severity scale of the Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-15) at 6 months (p = 0.008) that lacked significance at 12 months (p = 0.078). As additional between-group effects at 12 months, per-protocol analyses showed less health anxiety (Whiteley-7; p = 0.038) and less psychosocial distress (PHQ; p = 0.024); GP visits were significantly (p = 0.042) reduced in the intervention group. Conclusions: Compared to pure GP training, collaborative group intervention achieved a progressive, clinically meaningful improvement in mental but not physical QoL. It could bridge gaps between general practice and mental health care.

The patient-doctor relationship (PDR) as perceived by the patient is an important concept in primary care and psychotherapy. The PDR Questionnaire (PDRQ-9) provides a brief measure of the therapeutic aspects of the PDR in primary care.We assessed the internal and external validity of the German version of the PDRQ-9 in a representative cross-sectional German population survey that included 2,275 persons aged≥14 years who reported consulting with a primary care physician (PCP).The acceptance of the German version of this questionnaire was good. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that the PRDQ-9 was unidimensional. The internal reliability (Cronbach's α) of the total score was .95. The corrected item-total correlations were≥.94. The mean satisfaction index of persons with a probable depressive disorder was lower than that of persons without a probable depressive disorder, indicating good discriminative concurrent criterion validity. The correlation coefficient between satisfaction with PDR and satisfaction with pain therapy was r = .51 in 489 persons who reported chronic pain, indicating good convergent validity. Despite the limitation of low variance in the PDRQ-9 total scores, the results indicate that the German version of the PDRQ-9 is a brief questionnaire with good psychometric properties to assess German patients' perceived therapeutic alliance with PCPs in public health research.

No abstract

ObjectiveDistress screening programs aim to ensure appropriate psychooncological support for cancer patients, but many eligible patients do not use these services. To improve distress management, we need to better understand patients' supportive care needs. In this paper, we report the first key finding from a longitudinal study that focused on patients' intentions to use psychooncological support and its association with distress and uptake of the psychooncology service.MethodsWe conducted a prospective, observational study in an Oncology Outpatient Clinic and assessed distress, intention to use psychooncological support, and uptake of the psychooncology service by using the Distress Thermometer, a semistructured interview, and hospital records. We analyzed data with a mixed‐methods approach.ResultsOf 333 patients (mean age 61 years; 55% male; 54% Distress Thermometer ≥ 5), 25% intended to use the psychooncology service (yes), 33% were ambivalent (maybe), and 42% reported no intention (no). Overall, 23% had attended the psychooncology service 4 months later. Ambivalent patients reported higher distress than patients with no intention (odds ratio = 1.18, 95% confidence interval [1.06‐1.32]) but showed significantly lower uptake behavior than patients with an intention (odds ratio = 14.04, 95% confidence interval [6.74‐29.24]). Qualitative analyses revealed that ambivalent patients (maybe) emphasized fears and uncertainties, while patients with clear intentions (yes/no) emphasized knowledge, attitudes, and coping concepts.ConclusionsWe identified a vulnerable group of ambivalent patients with high distress levels and low uptake behavior. To optimize distress screening programs, we suggest addressing and discussing patients' supportive care needs in routine clinical practice.

No abstract