Marco Lehmann1, Christina Jonas2, Nadine Janis Pohontsch3, Thomas Zimmermann4, Martin Scherer5, Bernd Löwe6. 1. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Center for Internal Medicine, University Medical Center, Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany. Electronic address: ma.lehmann@uke.de. 2. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Center for Internal Medicine, University Medical Center, Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany. Electronic address: christina@heinbokel.net. 3. Department of General Practice/Primary Care, Center for Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Center, Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany. Electronic address: n.pohontsch@uke.de. 4. Department of General Practice/Primary Care, Center for Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Center, Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany. Electronic address: tzimmermann@uke.de. 5. Department of General Practice/Primary Care, Center for Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Center, Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany. Electronic address: m.scherer@uke.de. 6. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Center for Internal Medicine, University Medical Center, Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany. Electronic address: b.loewe@uke.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The innovations concerning the new diagnosis somatic symptom disorder (SSD) in the DSM-5 include the introduction of psychological diagnostic criteria and the elimination of the need to exclude all potential somatic causes of the symptoms. Thus far, it is unknown how general practitioners (GPs) evaluate the innovations conceptually and regarding their applicability in primary care. METHOD: We performed six focus groups with GPs. A semi-structured interview-guideline included a presentation of the innovations of SSD and questions about the innovations and their potential (dis-)advantages from the GPs' points of view. The material was analyzed using structuring qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 41 GPs participated (mean (sd) age = 51 (8.5) years, female = 17, male = 24). The GPs assessed that the diagnostic innovations could help them to focus on symptom-related concerns and anxiety as core aspects of the patients' complaints. However, the meaning of the term excessive in the psychological diagnostic criteria (i.e., excessive worries, anxiety, time and energy) was ambiguous for the GPs. The GPs appreciated that a mental disorder can be assigned in addition to a severe physical disease. The GPs found it unlikely that diagnostic workup of somatic symptoms would be cut short if the diagnostic criteria of SSD were fulfilled in a given patient. CONCLUSION: Altogether, for the GPs, the advantages of the new diagnostic criteria for SSD outweighed the disadvantages. In particular, the newly included psychological criteria were seen as an important advancement in comparison to the previous need of merely excluding a physical disease.
BACKGROUND: The innovations concerning the new diagnosis somatic symptom disorder (SSD) in the DSM-5 include the introduction of psychological diagnostic criteria and the elimination of the need to exclude all potential somatic causes of the symptoms. Thus far, it is unknown how general practitioners (GPs) evaluate the innovations conceptually and regarding their applicability in primary care. METHOD: We performed six focus groups with GPs. A semi-structured interview-guideline included a presentation of the innovations of SSD and questions about the innovations and their potential (dis-)advantages from the GPs' points of view. The material was analyzed using structuring qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 41 GPs participated (mean (sd) age = 51 (8.5) years, female = 17, male = 24). The GPs assessed that the diagnostic innovations could help them to focus on symptom-related concerns and anxiety as core aspects of the patients' complaints. However, the meaning of the term excessive in the psychological diagnostic criteria (i.e., excessive worries, anxiety, time and energy) was ambiguous for the GPs. The GPs appreciated that a mental disorder can be assigned in addition to a severe physical disease. The GPs found it unlikely that diagnostic workup of somatic symptoms would be cut short if the diagnostic criteria of SSD were fulfilled in a given patient. CONCLUSION: Altogether, for the GPs, the advantages of the new diagnostic criteria for SSD outweighed the disadvantages. In particular, the newly included psychological criteria were seen as an important advancement in comparison to the previous need of merely excluding a physical disease.
Authors: Bernd Löwe; James Levenson; Miriam Depping; Paul Hüsing; Sebastian Kohlmann; Marco Lehmann; Meike Shedden-Mora; Anne Toussaint; Natalie Uhlenbusch; Angelika Weigel Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 7.723