Physical complaints and symptoms of somatizing patients.

The purpose of the study was to describe the physical complaints and symptoms of persistent somatization patients. Individuals in the general population (age 17-49 yr) with at least 10 general admissions during an 8-yr period were studied. Persistent somatizers (i.e. patients with more than six medically unexplained general admissions) were compared with patients whose admissions could be ascribed to well-defined somatic disorders. Somatizers were characterized by multiple symptoms from many organ systems, and their physical complaints simulated most types of somatic disorder. Although some symptoms were more common than others, none were infrequent, so neither 'classic' conversion symptoms nor pain symptoms were found to be especially characteristic of the persistent somatizer. Gender had no influence on number of registered symptoms, whereas the number increases with age. The finding question the use of a predefined symptom checklist in the diagnostic criteria for somatizing disorder. The major part of the somatizers present a different illness picture when admitted with medically unexplained disorders compared with admission for which no adequate medical explanation could be found. However, one fifth had, when admitted with a medically explained diagnosis, also been admitted with the diagnosis medically unexplained at another admission. One fifth of the persistent somatizers had been admitted at least once for factitious illness, but apart from the fact that they had more symptoms and admissions, they did not differ from the other persistent somatizers.     

Temperament profiles and somatization--an epidemiological study of young adult people

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the temperament profiles of young adult somatizers in an epidemiological setting. We hypothesized that somatizers would have a characteristic temperament profile. METHODS: The sample consisted of 984 subjects at the age of 31 years. Data on somatization were gathered from a review of all public health outpatient records. Subjects with four or more somatization symptoms according to the DSM-III-R criteria were classified as somatizers. Temperament profiles were assessed using the Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI). RESULTS: Six males (1.3%) and 61 females (11.5%) met our criteria for somatization. Harm avoidance and reward dependence of the TCI profiles were associated with somatization symptoms in the whole sample. In logistic regression analysis, sex and psychological distress were associated with somatization but not with temperament profiles. CONCLUSION: We did not find a characteristic temperament profile for somatizers. This finding is in contrast to suggestions that somatization is associated with temperament profiles.     

Somatization symptoms in young adult Finnish population--associations with sex, educational level and mental health

We assessed somatization symptoms and their associations among a 31-year-old Finnish population sample (n=1598). Data on somatization symptoms were gathered from a review of all medical public outpatient records. Subjects with four or more somatization symptoms according to the DSM-III-R criteria were classified as somatizers. Ninety-seven (83 females) DSM-III-R somatizers (6.1%) were found. Somatization associated with female sex, lower educational level and increased psychiatric morbidity. Roughly half of the somatizers had a comorbid psychiatric disorder. Mood disorders did not associate specifically with somatization--in fact, after adjusting for sex and educational level only anxiety disorders and personality disorders associated with somatization. It may be concluded that it is important to recognize psychiatric disorders in subjects with somatization symptoms, especially as these symptoms have been shown to be treatable with both psychotherapy and psychiatric medication.     

Attribution in somatizers: stability and relationship to outcome at 1-year follow-up

The aim of this study was to determine whether attributional style is a stable pattern in somatizers, to analyse the sociodemographic and psychopathological characteristics that can modify it, and to study the relationship between attributional pattern and outcome. A total of 147 somatizers and 46 psychologizers from a representative sample (n=1559) of primary care patients in Zaragoza, Spain were followed up for 1 year. Attribution of somatic symptoms was a stable construct in somatizers. Patients who modified attribution were younger (by 15 years on average), tended to be without a partner, and had a shorter illness duration (by 20 months on average) than those who maintained it. Attribution showed no correlation with outcome at the 1-year follow-up.     

Somatization and alexithymia in young adult Finnish population

BACKGROUND: We assessed alexithymia and alexithymic features among young adult subjects with and without somatization symptoms in an epidemiological setting with a sample of young adults. METHODS: The sample consisted of urban 31-year-old subjects (N=1002). Data on somatization were gathered from a review of all public health outpatient records. Subjects with four or more somatization symptoms according to the DSM-III-R criteria were considered somatizers. The 20-item version of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) was used to measure alexithymia. Subjects with a total TAS score over 60 were considered as being alexithymic, and those with a score under 52 were considered nonalexithymic. Subjects with a total TAS score from 52 to 60 were considered as having alexithymic features. RESULTS: The prevalence of alexithymia was 6.0% among somatizers and 4.8% among subjects without somatization symptoms, and the prevalence of alexithymic features was 7.5% and 12.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: No association was found between alexithymia and somatization in young adult general population. The earlier theory of the association between alexithymia and somatization may be questionable.     

An adoption study of somatoform disorders. II. Identification of two discrete somatoform disorders

linical heterogeneity among women with prominent somatization was studied in a population of 859 adopted women in Sweden. We distinguished two groups of "somatizers" who differ in both the diversity of their somatic complaints and the frequency of their periods of disability. Type 1 or high-frequency somatizers have a high frequency of psychiatric, abdominal, and back complaints. Type 2 or diversiform somatizers have less frequent disability, but a greater diversity of complaints per occasion than do other somatizers. Diversiform somatizers have psychiatric chief complaints or backache in a lower proportion of their sick periods than either high-frequency somatizers or nonsomatizers. Quantitative measures of frequency and diversity were derived in a series of discriminant analyses. The distribution of scores on these measures indicated that high-frequency somatization and diversiform somatization were discrete disorders with little clinical overlap and rare intermediate cases. This demonstration of two discrete types of somatizers was confirmed in a replication sample.     

Birth order of patients with DSM-III-R somatization disorder

A sample of 143 patients, 76 meeting strict DSM-III-R criteria for somatization disorder and 67 somatizers, was studied using Slater's index to measure birth order position. The results showed that birth order position was not associated with the diagnosis of somatization disorder and that sibship position in both groups occurred by chance. Thus, although environmental factors may influence the development of somatization disorder, the expression of environmental influence through birth order is unlikely.     

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

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.     

Prevalence and correlates of psychiatric symptoms in north korean defectors

Objective

The aim of the present study is to assess the prevalence of psychiatric symptoms and associated factors in North Korean Defectors (NKDs).

Methods

One hundred forty-four NKDs (male: 20; female: 124; average age: 40.4±11.7 yrs.) completed the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R) and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale (CES-D). A stepwise logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate factors associated with the psychiatric symptoms of the participants.

Results

NKDs mainly reported somatization (42.4%) and depressive symptoms (38.9%). Female NKDs showed higher prevalence of somatization (p=0.001), anxiety (p=0.020), hostility (p=0.026) and psychoticism (p=0.022) than males. The presence of physical illness was strongly related to most psychiatric symptoms on the SCL-90-R including somatization (p<0.001), obsessive-compulsive symptoms (p=0.020), interpersonal sensitivity (p=0.031), depression (p<0.001), anxiety (p<0.001), hostility (p=0.011), paranoid ideation (p=0.015) and psychoticism (p<0.001). Younger age, unemployment, lower income, and longer duration of defection were found to be the risk factors of psychiatric symptoms. In regard to mental health service utilization, we found that most (83.3%) of the participants had not received any form of psychiatric help.

Conclusion

Somatization and depression were the most prevalent psychiatric symptoms in NKDs. Our results suggest that psychiatric symptoms accompany certain sociodemographic and clinical characteristics that are associated with susceptibility to acculturation stressors. An understanding of these factors will be helpful providing appropriate mental health services to NKDs.     

Selective attention and auditory event-related potentials in somatization disorder

Janet suggested a disorder of attention was fundamental to hysteria. This idea was investigated in this study by examining mismatch negativity (MMN), which depends upon a subtraction of cortical potentials evoked by background stimuli from those evoked by target stimuli. Ten patients with somatization disorder (SMD) were compared with ten normal individuals. MMN was smaller in somatizers, particularly at the central recording site. One interpretation of this observation is that somatizers respond more similarly than normals to "relevant" and "irrelevant" stimuli. This finding of an impairment in attentional processing in somatization disorder suggests a subtle neurophysiological disturbance.     

An adoption study of somatoform disorders. III. Cross-fostering analysis and genetic relationship to alcoholism and criminality

The genetic and environmental antecedents of two clinically distinct somatoform disorders were compared in 859 Swedish women adopted at an early age by nonrelatives. The characteristics of both the biological and adoptive parents of high-frequency "somatizers" were different from those of diversiform somatizers. The risk of diversiform somatization was increased in the adopted-away daughters of men treated for male-limited (type 2) alcoholism, but not in daughters of milieu-limited (type 1) alcoholics. In contrast, the biological fathers of high-frequency somatizers often had a history of recurrent convictions for violent crimes since adolescence, but no treatment for alcoholism. Similarly, alcohol abuse by the adoptive father was associated with increased risk of diversiform but not high-frequency somatization. Thus, high-frequency and diversiform somatization are not only clinically distinct, but also have different genetic and environmental backgrounds. The association of diversiform somatization with male-limited alcoholism, and not with milieu-limited alcoholism, also provides independent support for our earlier distinction between these two types of alcoholism.     

Auditory evoked response potentials in somatization disorder

Event related potentials to frequently and infrequently occurring tones were recorded from 15 patients with somatization disorder, 10 patients with anxiety disorders and 15 normals. P3 component responses were of normal latency and amplitude in the somatizers, which suggests they had no apparent difficulty with certain aspects of processing novel, task-relevant stimuli. However, their N1 component responses to the frequent tones, which subjects had been instructed to ignore, were enhanced relative to each of the other groups. Moreover, there was no difference in N1 amplitude to the two types of tones among the somatizers, whereas each of the other groups had significantly larger N1 amplitudes to the infrequent tones. These preliminary results may suggest that somatization disorder is associated with an impaired ability to filter out and not respond to relatively meaningless afferent stimuli.     

Somatized mental disorder among primary care arab patients: I. prevalence and clinical and sociodemographic characteristics

The aims of this study were to estimate the prevalence of somatized mental disorder (SMD) in comparison to psychologized mental disorder (PMD) among a sample of primary health care (PHC) Arab patients, and to investigate the clinical and sociodemographic characteristics of SMD. The first stage of study was conducted by general practitioners (GPs), using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). The second stage was carried out by a psychiatrist using the Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS) and an inquiry schedule. Specific operational criteria were used to identify SMD and PMD. The estimated prevalence rate of SMD among the total screened sample was 12%. SMD patients constituted 48% of the psychiatric patients identified, whereas, for the PMD group, this figure was 42%. Educational level was significantly lower in the SMD group. Headache, backache, and abdominal pain were the most commonly presented somatic symptoms. The symptoms pursued a chronic and persistent course and most patients experienced multiple symptoms. The most common ICD-10 psychiatric diagnoses among both SMD and PMD patients were mixed anxiety and depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and mood and adjustment disorders. Recurrent depressive disorder and dysthymia were significantly more prevalent in the PMD group. The severity of psychiatric illness identified was greater among psychologizers than the somatizers of mental disorder.     

Factors affecting disability in patients attending the internal medicine departments of general hospitals

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of sociodemographic factors, physical factors and mental factors on the physical and social disability of patients attending outpatient clinics of general hospitals. Physical and psychiatric morbidity in 1580 consecutive patients attending the internal medicine department of general hospitals was assessed using a stratified two-stage sampling design method. Of the total, 336 patients completed the second stage interview composed of Primary Care Version of Composite International Diagnostic Interview and Groningen Social Disability Schedule to assess sociodemographic, physical and mental factors. In this study, restricted activity days, disability days and Brief Disability Questionnaire were used for the assessment of physical disability, and Groningen Social Disability Schedule was used for social disability. Sociodemographic, physical and mental factors were all related to disability. Among sociodemographic factors, unemployment was associated with physical disability and social disability mildly. Among physical factors, the severity of physical disease was not associated with disability and medically explained somatic symptoms were associated with disability. Furthermore, the mental factor was more strongly associated with physical and social disability. It could be said that the mental factor is more strongly associated with physical and social disability than sociodemographic or physical factors. In addition, even mild mental symptoms not leading to ICD-10 mental disorders affected disability. From the viewpoint of the patients' burden, it is important to assess the mental symptoms as well as physical status in outpatient clinics of internal medicine or primary care.     

Surgery and medical treatment in persistent somatizing patients.

This study describes the utilization of surgical operations, frequency and outcome of medical and surgical treatment in a group of persistent somatizers compared with a control group of non-somatizers. The study was carried out using the Danish national medical register to identify persons in the general population (age range 17-49 yr) with at least 10 general admissions during an 8-yr period. Persistent somatizers were defined as persons with more than six medically unexplained general hospital admissions in their lifetimes before 1985. Conversely, non-somatizers were patients whose admissions could mainly be ascribed to well-defined somatic disorders. The findings show that persistent somatizers had been exposed to extensive surgery, outnumbering the non-somatizers. Surgical operations were of several categories, with gastrointestinal and gynaecological operations being the most frequent. The physicians used medical and surgical treatment nearly as often for treating persistent somatizers as in the treatment of the non-somatizers. Surgical or medical treatment was used in nearly half of the medically unexplained admissions. The outcome of the surgical treatment of the persistent somatizers was, however, generally unsuccessful in that the effect was unsatisfactory in three quarters of cases. Similarly, two thirds of the medical treatments were judged to be unsuccessful in persistent somatizers. The findings suggest that the costs of somatic diagnostic procedures and fruitless surgical and medical treatment attempts on persistent somatizers are enormous, and only exceeded by the risk of iatrogenic harm. This emphasizes the need for an early diagnosis of somatization and of treating it properly.     

Why do some psychiatric patients somatize?

A study was made of a series of 139 outpatients referred by the medical and surgical services of a general hospital for evaluation by the psychiatry unit. In accordance with established criteria, this population was divided into somatizers (56) and non-somatizers (75), and the socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of both groups were comparatively analyzed. The results show that the group of somatizers was younger, had more histrionic personality traits and more stress factors related with alterations in interpersonal relationships or death or disease of relatives. It is emphasized that somatization is poorly known by psychiatrists--whose diagnostic criteria practically omit these aspects--and by other physicians, in spite of its importance and frequency.     

Somatizing frequent attenders in primary health care

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this case-control study was to investigate the association of somatization with frequent attendance in primary health care. METHODS: Frequent attenders in a health center (FAs) (N=112) and age- and sex-matched controls (COs) (N=105) constituted the study series. Data were collected from annual statistics, medical records, postal questionnaires and personal interviews. Psychological distress was assessed using Symptom Checklist-36 (SCL-36), alexithymia was measured with Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (TAS-20) and hypochondriasis was screened with Whiteley Index (WI). RESULTS: About one-third of FAs were somatizers when a cut-off point of eight symptoms on the SCL-36 somatization subscale was used as a criterion. The significant association of somatization with frequent attendance disappeared in multivariate analyses when adjusted for age, sex and chronic somatic illnesses. Hypochondriacal beliefs and psychiatric comorbidity were connected with FAs' somatization. Hypochondriacal beliefs explained somatizers' frequent attendance. A significant interaction effect between somatization and hypochondriacal beliefs was found when explaining frequent attendance. CONCLUSION: The results emphasize the need to use a comprehensive approach of somatization, including hypochondriacal beliefs, when treating somatizing FA patients in primary health care.     

Somatization in Family Practice: Comparing 5 Methods of Classification

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that patients with somatoform disorders are high utilizers of medical care, yet interpretation of studies has been difficult because of variant methods of diagnosis. The goal of this study was to compare 5 different methods of classification on the same group of subjects and to examine prevalence rates of somatoform disorders and medical utilization. METHOD: Subjects completed a demographic questionnaire in the physician's office and the somatization section of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS) by telephone. Subsequently, their medical charts were examined. Using the 5 methods of diagnosis, somatizers were compared with nonsomatizers for level of utilization of medical services. The setting was a medical school-based family practice residency training center. Participants were 119 patients waiting to see their family doctors. The main outcome measures were prevalence of somatization symptoms and chart information (utilization, number of health problems). RESULTS: One subject met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV)-based DIS criteria for somatization disorder. With the Bucholz modification for scoring the DIS, 10 subjects were diagnosed with somatization disorder. With the abridged Escobar criteria of 6 symptoms, 7 subjects met diagnostic criteria, while 28 met the criteria for multisomatoform disorder of 3 symptoms, as suggested by Kroenke. The diagnosis of undifferentiated somatoform disorder, requiring only 1 unexplained symptom, was obtained by 94 of the subjects. CONCLUSION: Findings from this study revealed widely divergent prevalence rates of somatoform disorders, depending on methods of diagnosis used. Correlation with rates of medical utilization is suggested as an external criterion for validating diagnostic methods.     

Somatization in pediatric primary care: association with psychopathology, functional impairment, and use of services.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether classification as pediatric "somatizers" identifies a group of children and adolescents at high risk for psychopathology, functional impairment, and frequent use of health services in a large, multisite study of pediatric primary care. METHOD: Parental reports of frequent aches and pains and visits to the doctor for medically unexplained symptoms in children aged 4 to 15 years were used to construct a classification of somatization in pediatric primary care. Affected and unaffected children and adolescents were compared on measures of demographics, family functioning, psychopathology, functional status, and service use. RESULTS: Classification as a somatizer was more common in adolescents, females, minority subjects, urban practices, nonintact families, and families with lower levels of parental education and was associated with heightened risk of clinician- and parent-identified psychopathology, family dysfunction, poor school performance and attendance, perceived health impairment, and more frequent use of health and mental health services. CONCLUSIONS: Children classified as pediatric somatizers are at heightened risk for psychiatric disorder, family dysfunction, functional impairment, and frequent use of health services. Additional research is warranted, and clinicians should recognize the need for careful assessment and potential behavioral health referral in this population.     

Somatization in the community

We examined the prevalence of somatization disorder symptoms elicited with the Diagnostic Interview Schedule in 3132 community respondents interviewed in Los Angeles by the Epidemiologic Catchment Area program. The variables age, gender, ethnic background, and the presence of a psychiatric diagnosis significantly influenced the number of somatization symptoms reported. An introductory review on conceptual and nosological aspects of somatization phenomena led to the formulation of a less-restrictive operational definition of the somatizer. We found that 4.4% of the respondents met criteria for this abridged cutoff score of somatization, whereas only 0.03% of the respondents met criteria for the full DSM-III somatization disorder diagnosis. This abridged cutoff score was associated with sociodemographic factors and psychiatric diagnosis in the direction predicted.