Prevalence of medically unexplained symptoms in adults who are high users of health care services: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jadhakhan F
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6609118 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAround 1% of adults are repeatedly referred from primary to secondary care with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS); many of these patients have depression and anxiety disorders which are unrecognized or inadequately treated. We aimed to investigate the ways patients with MUS and their General Practitioners (GPs) interpret low mood and worry, whether they regard them as depressive or anxiety disorders and how they relate them causally to symptoms.MethodsWe carried out semi-structured interviews with 27 patients who had been repeatedly referred to specialists for MUS and their GPs and analysed transcripts by qualitative comparison. The analysis examined themes relating to low mood and worry, and their influence on symptoms. It drew on the concept of "otherness", whereby mental phenomena can be located either within the self or as separate entities.ResultsBoth patients and GPs acknowledged the presence of low mood and worry. They viewed low mood as either an individual's personal response to circumstances (including their physical symptoms) or as the illness called "depression"; only the latter was amenable to medical intervention. Worry was seen as a trait rather than as a symptom of an anxiety disorder. While low mood and worry were acknowledged to influence physical symptoms, they were considered insufficient to be the main cause by either the patients or their doctors.ConclusionsPatients with MUS who are high users of secondary care services interpret low mood and worry in ways which allow them to be discussed with professionals, but not as the cause of their physical symptoms.
| S-EPMC3197491 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To conduct a pilot trial of a primary care Symptoms Clinic for patients with medically unexplained symptoms and evaluate recruitment and retention, and acceptability of the intervention and to estimate potential treatment effects for a full trial.Randomised parallel group pilot trial.Primary care in one locality.Primary care database and postal questionnaire were used to identify patients with multiple specialist referrals and multiple physical symptoms unlikely to be explained by disease.General practitioner (GP) with special interest 'Symptoms Clinic' + usual care versus usual care alone. The Symptoms Clinic comprised one long (1 h) and three short (20 min) appointments.Number of patients identified and recruited; acceptability of the intervention (items from Client Satisfaction Questionnaire and interview); Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 12 (SF-12) physical component summary.Automated blocked randomisation accessed by telephone.None. NUMBERS RANDOMIZED: 16 to intervention and 16 to usual care alone.72 patients, from seven GP practices, had repeated specialist referrals and a Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-15 score of ?10 indicating a high probability of medically unexplained symptoms. 15 were ineligible and 25 declined to participate. NUMBERS ANALYSED: 26 patients; two patients randomised to the intervention group were incorrectly included, three patients in the intervention group and one control did not complete outcome measures.Most patients randomised to the Symptoms Clinic found the intervention acceptable: eight out of 11 reported the intervention helped them to deal with their problems. The mean difference between groups in SF-12 physical component summary, adjusted for baseline, was 3.8 points (SD 6).No observed harms.Patients with multiple medically unexplained symptoms can be systematically identified in primary care; a randomised trial comparing the Symptoms Clinic with usual care is feasible and has the potential to show clinically meaningful benefit.ISRCTN63083469.
| S-EPMC3330253 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUS) are often thought to deny psychological needs when they consult general practitioners (GPs) and to request somatic intervention instead. We tested predictions from the contrasting theory that they are transparent in communicating their psychological and other needs.To test predictions that what patients tell GPs when they consult about MUS is related transparently to their desire for (1) emotional support, (2) symptom explanation and (3) somatic intervention.Prospective naturalistic study. Before consultation, patients indicated what they wanted from it using a self-report questionnaire measuring patients' desire for: emotional support, explanation and reassurance, and physical investigation and treatment. Their speech during consultation was audio-recorded, transcribed and coded utterance-by-utterance. Multilevel regression analysis tested relationships between what patients sought and what they said.Patients (N = 326) consulting 33 GPs about symptoms that the GPs designated as MUS.Patients who wanted emotional support spoke more about psychosocial problems, including psychosocial causes of symptoms and their need for psychosocial help. Patients who wanted explanation and reassurance suggested more physical explanations, including diseases, but did not overtly request explanation. Patients' wish for somatic intervention was associated only with their talk about details of such interventions and not with their requests for them.In general, patients with medically unexplained symptoms provide many cues to their desire for emotional support. They are more indirect or guarded in communicating their desire for explanation and somatic intervention.
| S-EPMC2659147 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveThere is no proven primary care treatment for patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). We hypothesized that a long-term, multidimensional intervention by primary care providers would improve MUS patients' mental health.DesignClinical trial.SettingHMO in Lansing, MI.ParticipantsPatients from 18 to 65 years old with 2 consecutive years of high utilization were identified as having MUS by a reliable chart rating procedure; 206 subjects were randomized and 200 completed the study.InterventionFrom May 2000 to January 2003, 4 primary care clinicians deployed a 12-month intervention consisting of cognitive-behavioral, pharmacological, and other treatment modalities. A behaviorally defined patient-centered method was used by clinicians to facilitate this treatment and the provider-patient relationship.Main outcome measureThe primary endpoint was an improvement from baseline to 12 months of 4 or more points on the Mental Component Summary of the SF-36.ResultsTwo hundred patients averaged 13.6 visits for the year preceding study. The average age was 47.7 years and 79.1% were females. Using intent to treat, 48 treatment and 34 control patients improved (odds ratio [OR]=1.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08 to 3.40; P=.02). The relative benefit (relative "risk" for improving) was 1.47 (CI: 1.05 to 2.07), and the number needed to treat was 6.4 (95% CI: 0.89 to 11.89). The following baseline measures predicted improvement: severe mental dysfunction (P<.001), severe body pain (P=.039), nonsevere physical dysfunction (P=.003), and at least 16 years of education (P=.022); c-statistic=0.75.ConclusionThe first multidimensional intervention by primary care clinicians led to clinically significant improvement in MUS patients.
| S-EPMC1924714 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) constitute a major health problem because of their high prevalence, the suffering and disability they cause, and the associated medical costs. Web-based interventions may provide an accessible and convenient tool for managing MUS. We developed a personalized, Web-based, guided self-help intervention for MUS in primary care (Grip self-help) and would compare its effectiveness with that of usual care. OBJECTIVE:This paper aims to describe the rationale, objectives, and design of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT) assessing the effectiveness of Grip self-help. METHODS:For a pragmatic multicenter RCT, 165 adult patients with mild to moderate MUS will be recruited through general practices in the Netherlands. Randomization will be performed at general practice level. Over the course of several months, patients in the intervention group will receive a personalized set of Web-based self-help exercises, targeting the unhelpful cognitions, emotions, behaviors, and social factors that are relevant to them. The intervention is guided by a general practice mental health worker. The control group will receive care-as-usual. Primary outcome is physical health-related quality of life (RAND-36 or 36-item general health survey, physical component score). Secondary outcomes include severity of physical and psychological symptoms, mental health-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness, and acceptability. Assessments will take place at baseline, end of treatment, and at 16-, 26-, and 52-week follow-ups. RESULTS:Recruitment started in December 2018, and enrolment is ongoing. The first results are expected to be submitted for publication in December 2021. CONCLUSIONS:To our knowledge, this is the first study to combine the concepts of electronic health, self-help, and personalized medicine in the treatment of MUS. By improving the quality of life and reducing symptoms of patients with MUS, Grip self-help has the potential to reduce costs and conserve scarce health care resources. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Dutch Trial Register NTR7390; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7390. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):PRR1-10.2196/13738.
| S-EPMC6913687 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are highly prevalent and pose a burden both on patients and on health care. In a pilot study psychosomatic therapy delivered by specialised therapists for patients with MUS showed promising results with regard to patient's acceptability, feasibility and effects on symptoms. The aim of this study is to establish whether psychosomatic therapy by specialised psychosomatic exercise therapists is cost- effective in decreasing symptoms and improving functioning in patients who frequently consult their general practitioner (GP) with MUS. METHODS:A randomised effectiveness trial with an economic evaluation in primary care with 158 patients aged 18?years and older who are frequently consulting their GP with MUS. Patients will be assigned to psychosomatic therapy in addition to usual care or usual care only. Psychosomatic therapy is a multi-component and tailored intervention, aiming to empower patients by applying psycho-education, relaxation techniques, mindfulness, cognitive approaches and/or graded activity. Patients assigned to the psychosomatic therapy receive 6 to 12 sessions of psychosomatic therapy, of 30-45?min each, delivered by a specialised exercise or physical therapist. Primary outcome measure is patient-specific functioning and disability, measured with the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS). Secondary outcome measures are symptom severity, consultation frequency and referrals to secondary care, patient satisfaction, quality of life and costs. Assessments will be carried out at baseline, and after 4 and 12?months. An economic evaluation alongside the trial will be conducted from a societal perspective, with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as outcome measure. Furthermore, a mixed-methods process evaluation will be conducted. DISCUSSION:We expect that psychosomatic therapy in primary care for patients who frequently attend the GP for MUS will improve symptoms and daily functioning and disability, while reducing consultation frequency and referrals to secondary care. We expect that the psychosomatic therapy provides value for money for patients with MUS. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Netherlands Trial Register, ID: NL7157 (NTR7356). Registered 13 July 2018.
| S-EPMC6902505 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:In all healthcare settings, a small proportion of patients account for a large level of healthcare use and associated high healthcare costs. Depression and anxiety are common co-morbidities in patients who are high users of care. The aims of this systematic review are to: (1) estimate the prevalence of anxiety/depression in adults who are high users of general physical healthcare services and/or who accrue high healthcare costs (2) estimate the magnitude of healthcare use associated with the presence of anxiety/depression. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This review will include any studies where patients are high users of primary, secondary or emergency healthcare services and/or accrue high healthcare costs. This is the first systematic review to focus on patients who are over the age of 18, whose degree of anxiety/depression has been evaluated with a standardised questionnaire or by a clinical interview generating a diagnosis according to international diagnostic criteria. The review will include eligible studies indexed in Medline, PsychINFO, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Library from inception to 1 April 2019. We will estimate the prevalence of anxiety/depression in these populations and the magnitude of use associated with anxiety/depression across various general physical healthcare settings. We will provide a narrative description of findings and factors that may influence them. A meta-analysis may be pursued if the degree of heterogeneity across studies is acceptable. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This systematic review will use data from existing studies, hence no ethical approvals are required. Findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed publication and at relevant academic meetings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:PROSPERO CRD42018102628.
| S-EPMC6731873 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND: When medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) become persistent, it may have major implications for the patient, the general practitioner (GP) and for society.Early identification of patients with MUPS in electronic medical records (EMRs) might contribute to prevention of persistent MUPS by creating awareness among GPs and providing an opportunity to start stepped care management. However, procedures for identification of patients with MUPS in EMRs are not well established yet. In this validation study we explore the test characteristics of an EMR screening method to identify patients with MUPS. METHODS: The EMR screening method consists of three steps. First, all patients ? 18 years were included when they had five or more contacts in the last 12 months. Second, patients with known chronic conditions were excluded. Finally, patients were included with a MUPS syndrome or when they had three or more complaints suggestive for MUPS. We compared the results of the EMR screening method with scores on the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15), which we used as reference test. We calculated test characteristics for various cut-off points. RESULTS: From the 1223 patients in our dataset who completed the PHQ-15, 609 (49/8%) scored ? 5 on the PHQ-15. The EMR screening method detected 131/1223 (10.7%) as patients with MUPS. Of those, 102 (77.9%) scored ? 5 on the PHQ-15 and 53 (40.5%) scored ? 10. When compared with the PHQ-15 cut-off point ? 10, sensitivity and specificity were 0.30 and 0.93 and positive and negative predictive values were 0.40 and 0.89, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The EMR screening method to identify patients with MUPS has a high specificity. However, many potential MUPS patients will be missed. Before using this method as a screening instrument for selecting patients who might benefit from structured care, its sensitivity needs to be improved while maintaining its specificity.
| S-EPMC4052805 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn primary and secondary care medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) or functional somatic syndromes (FSS) constitute a major burden for patients and society with high healthcare costs and societal costs. Objectives were to provide an overview of the evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of interventions for MUS or FSS, and to assess the quality of these studies.MethodsWe searched the databases PubMed, PsycINFO, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED) and the CEA registry to conduct a systematic review. Articles with full economic evaluations on interventions focusing on adult patients with undifferentiated MUS or fibromyalgia (FM), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), with no restrictions on comparators, published until 15 June 2018, were included. We excluded preventive interventions. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and cost-effectiveness data and used the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria Checklist to appraise the methodological quality.ResultsA total of 39 studies out of 1,613 articles met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two studies reported costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost-utility analyses (CUAs). In 13 CUAs the intervention conditions dominated the control conditions or had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the willingness-to-pay threshold of € 50,000 per QALY, meaning that the interventions were (on average) cost-effective in comparison with the control condition. Group interventions focusing on MUS (n = 3) or FM (n = 4) might be more cost-effective than individual interventions. The included studies were heterogeneous with regard to the included patients, interventions, study design, and outcomes.ConclusionThis review provides an overview of 39 included studies of interventions for patients with MUS and FSS and the methodological quality of these studies. Considering the limited comparability due to the heterogeneity of the studies, group interventions might be more cost-effective than individual interventions.RegistrationStudy methods were documented in an international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) protocol, registration number: CRD42017060424.
| S-EPMC6188754 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC6334465 | biostudies-literature