Making sense of symptoms, clinicians and systems: a qualitative evaluation of a facilitated support group for patients with medically unexplained symptoms.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
Health services to date have inadequately addressed the physical and mental health needs of patients with medically unexplained symptoms. This qualitative study evaluates a piloted facilitated support group (FSG) developed for patients with medically unexplained symptoms to inform recommendations and resources for this patient population.Methods
Using a qualitative descriptive design, we conducted and thematically analyzed semi-structured interviews with participants (n = 8) and facilitators (n = 4) to explore their experiences of the facilitated support group. Common themes that captured strengths and challenges of the facilitated support group were identified.Results
The following key themes were identified through analysis of the data: Participants described 1) feeling validated through sharing similar experiences with peers; 2) learning practical symptom management and coping strategies; and 3) gaining new perspectives for navigating conversations with PCPs.Conclusions
Our findings show that a facilitated support group may provide additional forms of support and resources for patients with medically unexplained symptoms, filling a gap in currently available clinical care offered by health care professionals. Potential implications: This paper highlights lessons learned that can inform the design and delivery of future supports and resources directed toward optimizing patient care for this underserved patient population. Our findings are relevant to those who are involved in direct patient care or involved in designing and implementing self-management programs.
SUBMITTER: Marcinow M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8252243 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
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: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
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:OBJECTIVE: To describe the complexity of somatizing patients' symptomatology and the difficulties involved in the diagnostic process. DESIGN. Cross-sectional study of patients with medically unexplained symptoms. SETTING: Basque Health Service primary care centres in Bizkaia, Spain. SUBJECTS: The study comprised 156 patients selected at random from a list of 468 patients who had presented, over the course of their lives, six or more medically unexplained somatic symptoms for females and four or more for males, identified retrospectively by their practitioners. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physicians interviewed these patients using the somatoform symptoms section of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD). The Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 36 (SF-36) was filled in at home. Organic diseases whose diagnosis was established during the previous year were included in the study by consulting patients' medical records. RESULTS: Patients were found to have a median of three medically explained and 12 medically unexplained symptoms. Mental disorders were found in 83% of cases, associated with other morbidity categories in 78%. The predictive value of symptoms was lower than 26% for diagnosing broad disease categories. CONCLUSIONS: These results depict an extremely difficult scenario for dichotomous diagnostic strategies aimed at classifying patients' symptoms as either organic or functional. Rather than struggling to choose one of these hypotheses, it is suggested that both of them should always be addressed concurrently.
| S-EPMC3406656 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are a common yet challenging encounter in primary care. The aim of this study was to explore how general practitioners (GPs) understand and handle MUS. METHODS:Three focus group interviews were conducted with a total of 23 GPs. Participants with varied clinical experience were purposively recruited. The data were analysed thematically, using the concept of framing as an analytical lens. RESULTS:The GPs alternated between a biomedical frame, centred on disease, and a biopsychosocial frame, centred on the sick person. Each frame shaped the GPs' understanding and handling of MUS. The biomedical frame emphasised the lack of objective evidence, problematized subjective patient testimony, and manifested feelings of uncertainty, doubt and powerlessness. This in turn complicated patient handling. In contrast, the biopsychosocial frame emphasised clinical experience, turned patient testimony into a valuable source of information, and manifested feelings of confidence and competence. This in turn made them feel empowered. The GPs with the least experience relied more on the biomedical frame, whereas their more seasoned seniors relied mostly on the biopsychosocial frame. CONCLUSION:The biopsychosocial frame helps GPs to understand and handle MUS better than the biomedical frame does. Medical students should spend more time learning biopsychosocial medicine, and to integrate the clinical knowledge of their peers with their own.
| S-EPMC5932817 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In early 2020, a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) leading to a potentially fatal condition was discovered. Since then, the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has spread worldwide becoming a pandemic. Beyond the risks strictly related to the infection, concerns have been expressed for the psychological impact that COVID-19 may have, especially on vulnerable individuals with pre-existing mental health conditions. Somatic symptom disorder (SSD) is characterized by a dysfunctional preoccupation with physical symptoms leading to excessive and unnecessary healthcare utilization. Despite being quite common, such condition remains underrecognized. We report a detailed clinical case of a 16 years old adolescent, who presented with a history suggestive of COVID-19 infection and associated psychological distress. Despite testing negative for the presence of SARS-CoV-2, his extreme and persisting health preoccupations required an inpatient admission to the Child and Adolescent Neuropsychiatric Unit. He responded rapidly to a low dose of antipsychotic and an antidepressant. Based on his medical history and current presentation, he received a diagnosis of SSD. When COVID-19-like symptoms occur, we highlight the importance of differentially diagnosing a possible exacerbation of a pre-existing SSD, triggered by fear of being infected. This may help preventing further burden to the healthcare system.
| S-EPMC7166302 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Further research on effective interventions for patients with peristent Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms (MUPS) in general practice is needed. Prevalence estimates of such patients are conflicting, and other descriptive knowledge is needed for development and evaluation of effective future interventions. In this study, we aimed to estimate the consultation prevalence of patients with persistent MUPS in general practice, including patients' characteristics and symptom pattern, employment status and use of social benefits, and the general practitioners' (GPs) management strategy. METHOD: During a four-week period the participating Norwegian GPs (n=84) registered all consultations with patients who met a strict definition of MUPS (>3 months duration and function loss), using a questionnaire with simple tick-off questions. Analyses were performed with descriptive statistics for all variables and split analysis on gender and age. RESULTS: The GPs registered 526 patients among their total of 17 688 consultations, giving a consultation prevalence of persistent MUPS of 3%. The mean age of patients was 46 years, and 399 (76%) were women. The most frequent group of symptoms was musculoskeletal problems, followed by asthenia/fatigue. There was no significant gender difference in symptom pattern. Almost half of the patients were currently working (45%), significantly more men. The major GP management strategy was supportive counseling. CONCLUSION: A consultation prevalence rate of 3% implies that patients with persistent MUPS are common in general practice. Our study disclosed heterogeneity among the patients such as differences in employment status, which emphasizes the importance of personalized focus rather than unsubstantiated stereotyping of "MUPS patients" as a group.
| S-EPMC4041895 | biostudies-other
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:Systems biology approaches have been applied over the last two decades to study plant sulphur metabolism. These 'sulphur-omics' approaches have been developed in parallel with the advancing field of systems biology, which is characterized by permanent improvements of high-throughput methods to obtain system-wide data. The aim is to obtain a holistic view of sulphur metabolism and to generate models that allow predictions of metabolic and physiological responses. Besides known sulphur-responsive genes derived from previous studies, numerous genes have been identified in transcriptomics studies. This has not only increased our knowledge of sulphur metabolism but has also revealed links between metabolic processes, thus indicating a previously unexpected complex interconnectivity. The identification of response and control networks has been supported through metabolomics and proteomics studies. Due to the complex interlacing nature of biological processes, experimental validation using targeted or systems approaches is ongoing. There is still room for improvement in integrating the findings from studies of metabolomes, proteomes, and metabolic fluxes into a single unifying concept and to generate consistent models. We therefore suggest a joint effort of the sulphur research community to standardize data acquisition. Furthermore, focusing on a few different model plant systems would help overcome the problem of fragmented data, and would allow us to provide a standard data set against which future experiments can be designed and compared.
| S-EPMC6698701 | biostudies-literature