Literature DB >> 10642907

A review of the differences between somatizing and psychologizing patients in primary care.

J Garcia-Campayo1, C Sanz-Carrillo.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This article reviews all published studies on somatizing and psychologizing patients in primary care, according to Bridges and Goldberg's criteria [1].
METHOD: A review of the Medline base from 1985 to 1998 was carried out.
RESULTS: Somatization is a concept valid, reliable, and stable over time. There are no differences between somatizers and psychologizers in sociodemographics, social problems or past medical and psychiatric history. The main clinical and diagnostic difference is a predominance of depressive symptoms and disorders in psychologizers. Finally, the most remarkable differences between somatizers and psychologizers are found in personality traits, such as attribution of somatic symptoms. However, some traits considered important in the outcome of somatizers, such as hypochondriasis or locus of control, show no differences between both groups of patients.
CONCLUSION: Contrary to what was expected, the comparison between these two groups of patients give few clues for the etiology and treatment of somatization. Follow-up studies should be the main source of data to answer these questions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10642907     DOI: 10.2190/FMJ2-UK3Y-FKB8-DCGN

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Psychiatry Med        ISSN: 0091-2174            Impact factor:   1.210


  5 in total

1.  Should general psychiatry ignore somatization and hypochondriasis?

Authors:  Francis Creed
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 49.548

2.  RCT of a care manager intervention for major depression in primary care: 2-year costs for patients with physical vs psychological complaints.

Authors:  L Miriam Dickinson; Kathryn Rost; Paul A Nutting; Carl E Elliott; Robert D Keeley; Harold Pincus
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2005 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.166

3.  Voiced but unheard agendas: qualitative analysis of the psychosocial cues that patients with unexplained symptoms present to general practitioners.

Authors:  Peter Salmon; Christopher F Dowrick; Adele Ring; Gerry M Humphris
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Psychosocioeconomic study of medically unexplained physical symptoms.

Authors:  Maju Mathew Koola; Praveenlal Kuttichira
Journal:  Indian J Psychol Med       Date:  2012-04

Review 5.  Beyond somatisation: a review of the understanding and treatment of medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS).

Authors:  Christopher Burton
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 5.386

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.