Search

BACKGROUND: Somatizing patients have maladaptive and increased rates of medical care utilization. If there were a way of routinely identifying such patients, one that did not require intensive, case-by-case review, they could be targeted for specific interventions to improve their use of medical care. OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify patterns of medical care utilization that would distinguish somatizing and nonsomatizing medical outpatients with acceptable sensitivity and specificity. DESIGN: Subjects completed questionnaires assessing somatization and sociodemographic characteristics. Their medical care utilization was obtained for the 12 months preceding the index visit. We then used multivariable logistic regression and recursive partitioning to identify patients with a provisional diagnosis of somatoform disorder. These exploratory models used various patterns of medical care utilization and sociodemographic characteristics as the independent variables. SUBJECTS: We studied consecutive adults attending 2 primary care practices on randomly chosen days. MEASURES: The provisional diagnosis of a somatoform disorder was assessed with a 15-item self-report questionnaire. The number of primary care visits, specialty visits, mental health visits, emergency visits, and inpatient and outpatient costs were obtained for the 12 months preceding the index visit from our hospital's automated medical records, which also provided a rating of aggregate medical morbidity. Self-reported utilization outside our hospital system was obtained from a subsample of patients. RESULTS: Complete data were obtained on 1440 patients. Somatizing patients had more specialty care than primary care visits, higher outpatient than inpatient costs, and more emergency visits than nonsomatizing patients. A regression model containing 7 measures of utilization and 4 sociodemographic characteristics distinguished somatizing and nonsomatizing patients with a c-statistic = 0.73. Recursive partitioning identified 10 terminal nodes with a very high specificity (99%) but a very low sensitivity (15%). CONCLUSIONS: We identified 7 discrete patterns of medical care utilization that distinguished somatizing and nonsomatizing patients. However, they did so with only modest specificity and sensitivity. This algorithm might be used effectively as the first step in a 2-step screening procedure whose second step would entail more intensive screening or individual, case-by-case review to identify somatizing patients in primary care practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the adverse impact of certain environmental agents is well established and affect individuals in a predictable dose-dependent manner, the validity of some exposure syndromes, such as environmental sensitivity, attributed to the influence of environmental chemicals in low, usually harmless doses, is less certain. Diagnosis of environmental sensitivity is subjective, and both standard medical and complementary and alternative treatment often fails to provide clinically meaningful functional gains. Existing evidence suggests that in many individuals with these syndromes, psychosocial factors play a prominent role. In this article we present an approach to managing patients presenting with sensitivities to environmental agents that includes identifying and managing organic disease, obtaining a thorough biopsychosocial history, confirming a diagnosis, and developing a rehabilitative process that focuses on support and improvements in function. A case of multiple chemical sensitivity illustrates this approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The mechanism of symptom amplification, developed in the study of somatization, may be helpful in caring for patients with symptoms that, while they have a demonstrable medical basis, are nonetheless disproportionately severe and distressing. Amplified medical symptoms are marked by disproportionate physical suffering, unduly negative thoughts and concerns about them, and elevated levels of health-related anxiety. They are accompanied by extensive and sustained illness behaviors, disproportionate difficulty compartmentalizing them and circumscribing their impact, and consequent problems and dissatisfaction with their medical care. A distinction has long been made between "medically explained" and "medically unexplained" symptoms. However, a more comprehensive view of symptom phenomenology undermines this distinction and places all symptoms along a smooth continuum regardless of cause: Recent findings in cognitive neuroscience suggest that all symptoms-regardless of origin-are processed through convergent pathways. The complete conscious experience of both medically "explained" and "unexplained" symptoms is an amalgam of a viscerosomatic sensation fused with its ascribed salience and the patient's ideas, expectations, and concerns about the sensation. This emerging empirical evidence furnishes a basis for viewing persistent, disproportionately distressing symptoms of demonstrable disease along a continuum with medically unexplained symptoms. Thus, therapeutic modalities developed for somatization and medically unexplained symptoms can be helpful in the care of seriously ill medical patients with amplified symptoms. These interventions include educational groups for coping with chronic illness, cognitive therapies for dysfunctional thoughts, behavioral strategies for maladaptive illness behaviors, psychotherapy for associated emotional distress, and consultation with mental health professionals to assist the primary care physician with difficulties in medical management., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Background: Health anxiety may exist with or without prominent somatic symptoms, but the impact of somatic symptoms on treatment response is unclear. The study objective was to examine this question further as symptom burden may impact choice of type of treatment. Methods: This exploratory study used a unique database from a prior trial of 193 individuals with DSM-IV hypochondriasis who had been randomly assigned to either cognitive behavioral therapy, fluoxetine, combined therapy, or placebo. Two subgroups were newly defined-no/low somatic burden ( n = 42) and prominent somatic burden ( n = 151). Response was defined by ≥30% improvement in hypochondriasis. Results: Among high somatic hypochondriacal participants, compared to placebo, the odds of being a responder were significantly greater among those who received fluoxetine, either alone (OR = 4.46; 95% CI: 1.38, 14.41) or with cognitive behavioral therapy (OR = 3.56; 95% CI: 1.19, 10.68); the estimated odds were not significantly different for those receiving cognitive behavioral therapy alone (OR = 1.81; 95% CI: 0.59, 5.54). In contrast, among low somatic hypochondriacal participants, compared to placebo, the observed odds of being a responder were similar in magnitude and direction for those who received cognitive behavioral therapy, either alone (OR = 3.00; 95% CI: 0.38, 23.68) or in combination with fluoxetine (OR = 3.60; 95% CI: 0.62, 21.03), compared to the odds for those receiving fluoxetine alone (OR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.14, 5.65). High somatic hypochondriacal individuals assigned to any fluoxetine group had significantly greater odds of being a responder than those who had not received fluoxetine (OR = 2.70; 95% CI: 1.33, 5.48). Low somatic hypochondriacal individuals assigned to any cognitive behavioral therapy group had significantly greater odds of being a responder than those who had not received cognitive behavioral therapy (OR = 8.03; 95% CI: 1.41, 45.67). Conclusion: These findings indicate that somatic symptom burden may be important in guiding treatment selection among individuals with marked health anxiety, as hypochondriacal individuals with high somatic burden responded more often to fluoxetine while those with low somatic burden responded more often to cognitive behavioral therapy. Systematic replication with larger studies is needed., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Fallon, Basaraba, Pavlicova, Ahern and Barsky.)

Background: This study aims to determine the role of patient expectations as potentially modifiable factor of side-effects, quality of life, and adherence to endocrine treatment of breast cancer., Patients and Methods: A 2-year prospective clinical cohort study was conducted in routine primary care with postoperative patients with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer, scheduled to start adjuvant endocrine treatment. Structured patient-reported assessments of side-effects, side-effect expectations, quality of life, and adherence took place during the first week post-surgery and after 3 and 24 months of endocrine treatment., Results: Of 111 enrolled patients, at 3 and 24 months, 107 and 88 patients, respectively, were assessed. After 2 years of endocrine treatment, patients reported high rates of side-effects (arthralgia: 71.3%, weight gain: 53.4%, hot flashes: 46.5%), including symptoms not directly attributable to the medication (breathing problems: 28.1%, dizziness: 25.6%). Pre-treatment expectations significantly predicted patient-reported long-term side-effects and quality of life in multivariate models controlling for relevant medical and psychological variables. Relative risk of side-effects after 2 years of endocrine treatment was higher in patients with high negative expectations at baseline than in those with low negative expectations (RR = 1.833, CI 95%, 1.032-3.256). A significant interaction confirmed this expectation effect to be particularly evident in patients with high side-effects at 3 months. Furthermore, baseline expectations were associated with adherence at 24 months (r = -0.25, P = 0.006)., Conclusions: Expectations are a genuine factor of clinical outcome from endocrine treatment for breast cancer. Negative expectations increase the risk of treatment-specific side-effects, nocebo side-effects, and non-adherence. Yet, controlled studies are needed to analyze potential causal relationships. Optimizing individual expectations might be a promising strategy to improve side-effect burden, quality of life, and adherence during longer-term drug intake., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02088710., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Benzodiazepine use is associated with adverse drug events and higher mortality. Known risk factors for benzodiazepine-related adverse events include lung disease, substance use, and vulnerability to fracture., Objective: To determine whether benzodiazepine prescribing is associated with risk factors for adverse outcomes., Design: Longitudinal cohort study between July 1, 2011, and June 30, 2012., Participants: Patients who visited hospital- and community-based practices in a primary care practice-based research network., Main Measures: Odds ratio of having a target medical diagnosis for patients who received standard and high-dose benzodiazepine prescriptions; rates per 100 patients for outpatient and emergency department visits and hospitalizations., Key Results: Among 65,912 patients, clinicians prescribed at least one benzodiazepine to 15 % (9821). Of benzodiazepine recipients, 5 % received high doses. Compared to non-recipients, benzodiazepine recipients were more likely to have diagnoses of depression (OR, 2.7; 95 % CI, 2.6-2.9), substance abuse (OR, 2.2; 95 % CI, 1.9-2.5), tobacco use (OR, 1.7; 95 % CI, 1.5-1.8), osteoporosis (OR, 1.6; 95 % CI, 1.5-1.7), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 1.6; 95 % CI, 1.5-1.7), alcohol abuse (OR, 1.5; 95 % CI, 1.3-1.7), sleep apnea (OR, 1.5; 95 % CI, 1.3-1.6), and asthma (OR, 1.5; 95 % CI, 1.4-1.5). Compared to low-dose benzodiazepine recipients, high-dose benzodiazepine recipients were even more likely to have certain medical diagnoses: substance abuse (OR, 7.5; 95 % CI, 5.5-10.1), alcohol abuse (OR, 3.2; 95 % CI, 2.2-4.5), tobacco use (OR, 2.7; 95 % CI, 2.1-3.5), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 1.5; 95 % CI, 1.2-1.9). Benzodiazepine recipients had more primary care visits per 100 patients (408 vs. 323), specialist outpatient visits (815 vs. 578), emergency department visits (47 vs. 29), and hospitalizations (26 vs. 15; p < .001 for all comparisons)., Conclusions: Clinicians prescribed benzodiazepines and high-dose benzodiazepines more frequently to patients at higher risk for benzodiazepine-related adverse events. Benzodiazepine prescribing was associated with increased healthcare utilization.

Prior studies have shown that perceived health status is a consistent and reliable predictor of morbidity and mortality. Because perceived health status and objective health are not highly correlated, we sought to identify additional factors that shape self-perceptions of health. Research suggests that childhood experience is an important predictor of health in adulthood, but most studies are retrospective. Using data from a 70-year prospective study of psychosocial development, we examined the quality of childhood environment as a predictor of perceived health in late life. This study utilizes questionnaire data from a longitudinal study of adult development to examine predictors of perceived health across seven decades. Participants were members of the Study of Adult Development, a longitudinal study of men followed for seven decades beginning in late adolescence. Childhood environment characteristics were assessed during home visits and interviews with respondents' parents at entry into the study. At ages 63, 73, and 78, current health status was measured by an internist not affiliated with the Study, and perceived health was assessed via self-report questionnaires. Linear regression analyses were conducted to examine childhood environment as a predictor of perceived health status at these 3 time points while controlling for concurrent objective health and young adult neuroticism. Childhood environment predicted perceived health at all 3 time points. This study supports the hypothesis that the quality of childhood environment makes a unique contribution above and beyond personality traits and objective health status to perceptions of health in late life.

Background: Somatization and hypochondriacal health anxiety are common sources of distress, impairment, and costly medical utilization in primary care practice. A range of interventions is needed to improve the care of these patients., Objective: To determine the effectiveness of two cognitive behavioral interventions for high-utilizing, somatizing patients, using the resources found in a routine care setting., Design: Patients were randomly assigned to a two-step cognitive behavioral treatment program accompanied by a training seminar for their primary care physicians, or to relaxation training. Providers routinely working in these patients' primary care practices delivered the cognitive behavior therapy and relaxation training. A follow-up assessment was completed immediately prior to treatment and 6 and 12 months later., Subjects: Eighty-nine medical outpatients with elevated levels of somatization, hypochondriacal health anxiety, and medical care utilization., Measurements: Somatization and hypochondriasis, overall psychiatric distress, and role impairment were assessed with well-validated, self-report questionnaires. Outpatient visits and medical care costs before and after the intervention were obtained from the encounter claims database., Results: At 6 month and 12 month follow-up, both intervention groups showed significant improvements in somatization (p < 0.01), hypochondriacal symptoms (p < 0.01), overall psychiatric distress (p < 0.01), and role impairment (p < 0.01). Outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups. When both groups were combined, ambulatory visits declined from 10.3 to 8.8 (p = 0.036), and mean ambulatory costs decreased from $3,574 to $2,991 (pp = 0.028) in the year preceding versus the year following the interventions. Psychiatric visits and costs were unchanged., Conclusions: Two similar cognitive behavioral interventions, delivered with the resources available in routine primary care, improved somatization, hypochondriacal symptoms, overall psychiatric distress, and role function. They also reduced the ambulatory visits and costs of these high utilizing outpatients.

Objective: This study examines the determinants of patients' side effects from arthritis medication. Proposed predictors were patients' beliefs about medications, objective disease activity, treatment regimen, and psychiatric and rheumatoid arthritis symptoms., Methods: In a longitudinal design, 100 rheumatoid arthritis outpatients were investigated at baseline and again at 6 months after receiving both pharmacologic and psychosocial treatment., Results: Multivariate analyses showed no influence of disease status, type of treatment, or psychiatric or arthritis symptoms on side effects. Heightened concerns about arthritis medication at baseline predicted side effects at baseline (partial correlation r = 0.37, P < 0.001) and at 6 months (partial correlation r = 0.25, P < 0.001) after controlling for relevant disease- and treatment-related variables. In a cross-lagged panel analysis, prior experience with side effects from arthritis medication was ruled out as a cause of heightened concerns, indicating that negative beliefs genuinely contribute to side effects. A comparison of patients who did and did not start new medications showed no difference in side effects in patients with positive beliefs about medications, but led to significantly more side effects in patients with negative beliefs., Conclusion: Patients' beliefs about arthritis medications were stable and consistently associated with side effects. Patients with greater concerns about their arthritis medications are at higher risk for developing side effects, especially when starting new drugs. Identifying those patients is important to avoid premature drug discontinuation. Research into cause and preventability of negative attitudes to prescribed medicines is needed.

Background: Somatoform disorders are an important factor in functional disability and role impairment, though their independent contribution to disability has been unclear because of prevalent medical and psychiatric comorbidity., Objectives: To assess the extent of the overlap of somatization with other psychiatric disorders and medical problems, to compare the functional disability and role impairment of somatizing and non-somatizing patients, and to determine the independent contribution of somatization to functional disability and role impairment., Design: Patients were surveyed with self-report questionnaires assessing somatization, psychiatric disorder, and role impairment. Medical morbidity was indexed with a computerized medical record audit., Participants: Consecutive adults making scheduled visits to their primary care physicians at two hospital-affiliated primary care practices on randomly chosen days., Measurements: Intermediate activities of daily living, social activities, and occupational disability., Results: Patients with somatization, as well as those with serious medical and psychiatric illnesses, had significantly more impairment of activities of daily life and social activities. When these predictors were considered simultaneously in a multivariable regression, the association with somatization remained highly significant and was comparable to or greater than many major medical conditions., Conclusions: Patients with somatization had substantially greater functional disability and role impairment than non-somatizing patients. The degree of disability was equal to or greater than that associated with many major, chronic medical disorders. Adjusting the results for psychiatric and medical co-morbidity had little effect on these findings.

Many patients with somatoform disorders are frequently encountered in psychosomatic clinics as well as in primary care clinics. To assess such patients objectively, the concept of somatosensory amplification may be useful. Somatosensory amplification refers to the tendency to experience a somatic sensation as intense, noxious, and disturbing. It may have a role in a variety of medical conditions characterized by somatic symptoms that are disproportionate to demonstrable organ pathology. It may also explain some of the variability in somatic symptomatology found among different patients with the same serious medical disorder. It has been assessed with a self-report questionnaire, the Somatosensory Amplification Scale. This instrument was developed in a clinical setting in the U.S., and the reliability and validity of the Japanese and Turkish versions have been confirmed as well.Many studies have attempted to clarify the specific role of somatosensory amplification as a pathogenic mechanism in somatization. It has been reported that somatosensory amplification does not correlate with heightened sensitivity to bodily sensations and that emotional reactivity exerts its influence on somatization via a negatively biased reporting style. According to our recent electroencephalographic study, somatosensory amplification appears to reflect some aspects of long-latency cognitive processing rather than short-latency interoceptive sensitivity.The concept of somatosensory amplification can be useful as an indicator of somatization in the therapy of a broad range of disorders, from impaired self-awareness to various psychiatric disorders. It also provides useful information for choosing appropriate pharmacological or psychological therapy. While somatosensory amplification has a role in the presentation of somatic symptoms, it is closely associated with other factors, namely, anxiety, depression, and alexithymia that may also influence the same. The specific role of somatosensory amplification with regard to both neurological and psychological function should be clarified in future studies. In this paper, we will explain the concept of amplification and describe its role in psychosomatic illness.

The global war on terrorism has led to increased concern about the ability of the U.S. healthcare system to respond to casualties from a chemical, biological, or radiological agent attack. Relatively little attention, however, has focused on the potential, in the immediate aftermath of such an attack, for large numbers of casualties presenting to triage points with acute health anxiety and idiopathic physical symptoms. This sort of "mass idiopathic illness" is not a certain outcome of chemical, biological, or radiological attack. However, in the event that this phenomenon occurs, it could result in surges in demand for medical evaluations that may disrupt triage systems and endanger lives. Conversely, if continuous primary care is not available for such patients after initial triage, many may suffer with unrecognized physical and emotional injuries and illness. This report is the result of an expert planning initiative seeking to facilitate triage protocols that will address the possibility of mass idiopathic illness and bolster healthcare system surge capacity. The report reviews key triage assumptions and gaps in knowledge and offers a four-stage triage model for further discussion and research. Optimal triage approaches offer flexibility and should be based on empirical studies, critical incident modeling, lessons from simulation exercises, and case studies. In addition to staging, the proposed triage and longitudinal care model relies on early recognition of symptoms, development of a registry, and use of non-physician care management to facilitate later longitudinal followup and collaboration between primary care and psychiatry for the significant minority of patients who develop persistent idiopathic symptoms associated with reduced functional status.

Objectives: To examine the resource utilization of patients with high levels of somatization and health-related anxiety., Design: Consecutive patients on randomly chosen days completed a self-report questionnaire assessing somatization and health-related, hypochondriacal anxiety. Their medical care utilization in the year preceding and following completion of the questionnaire was obtained from an automated patient record. The utilization of patients above and below a predetermined threshold on the questionnaire was then compared., Patients and Setting: Eight hundred seventy-six patients attending a primary care clinic in a large, urban, teaching hospital., Outcome Measures: Number of ambulatory physician visits (primary care and specialist), outpatient costs (total, physician services, and laboratory procedures), proportion of patients hospitalized, and proportion of patients receiving emergency care., Results: Patients in the uppermost 14% of the clinic population on somatization and hypochondriacal health anxiety had appreciably and significantly higher utilization in the year preceding and the year following completion of the somatization questionnaire than did the rest of the patients in the clinic. After adjusting for group differences in sociodemographic characteristics and medical comorbidity, significant differences in utilization remained. In the year preceding the assessment of somatization, their adjusted total outpatient costs were $1,312 (95% CI $1154, $1481) versus $954 (95% CI $868, $1057) for the remainder of the patients and the total number of physician visits was 9.21 (95% CI 7.94, 10.40) versus 6.33 (95% CI 5.87, 6.90). In the year following the assessment of somatization, those above the threshold had adjusted total outpatient costs of $1,395 (95% CI $1243, $1586) versus $1,145 (95% CI $1038, $1282), 9.8 total physician visits (95% CI 8.66, 11.07) versus 7.2 (95% CI 6.62, 7.77), and had a 24% (95% CI 19%, 30%) versus 17% (95% CI 14%, 20%) chance of being hospitalized., Conclusions: Primary care patients who somatize and have high levels of health-related anxiety have considerably higher medical care utilization than nonsomatizers in the year before and after being assessed. This differential persists after adjusting for differences in sociodemographic characteristics and medical morbidity.

Women report more intense, more numerous, and more frequent bodily symptoms than men. This difference appears in samples of medical patients and in community samples, whether or not gynecologic and reproductive symptoms are excluded, and whether all bodily symptoms or only those which are medically unexplained are examined. More limited, but suggestive, literature on experimental pain, symptom reporting in childhood, and pain thresholds in animals are compatible with these findings in adults. A number of contributory factors have been implicated, supported by varying degrees of evidence. These include innate differences in somatic and visceral perception; differences in symptom labeling, description, and reporting; the socialization process, which leads to differences in the readiness to acknowledge and disclose discomfort; a sex differential in the incidence of abuse and violence; sex differences in the prevalence of anxiety and depressive disorders; and gender bias in research and in clinical practice. General internists need to keep these factors in mind in obtaining the clinical history, understanding the meaning and significance that symptoms hold for each patient, and providing symptom relief.

Background: The aim of this study was to determine the predictors of persistent palpitations and continued medical utilization in a sample of medical patients referred for ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring., Methods: A prospective telephone follow-up was conducted with patients who had undergone ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring 3 months earlier. At inception, patients completed in-person interviews and self-report questionnaires, assessing somatization, hypochondriacal attitudes, bodily amplification (high degree of sensitivity to bodily sensations), and two types of life stress (minor daily irritants and major life changes). At follow-up, patients completed a structured interview about their clinical course, palpitations, and utilization of medical care during the interval., Results: At 3-month follow-up, 55 of the inception cohort of 67 patients were interviewed again. The mean severity of palpitations for the entire sample declined significantly, but 46 (83.6%) patients continued to experience their presenting symptoms. Stepwise multiple linear regression revealed that the interaction of bodily amplification and daily life stress at inception uniquely explained 10.0% of the variance in palpitation severity at follow-up. A four-step model composed of these two interaction terms and age and education level accounted for 21.4% of the variance in palpitations. The medical utilization findings are complementary in that the interaction of amplification and daily irritants at baseline predicted the number of unscheduled medical visits over the subsequent 3 months. The total number of ventricular premature contractions occurring during ambulatory monitoring was not a significant predictor of palpitations., Conclusions: Palpitations are more persistent in persons who are both highly sensitive to bodily sensations and who experience a greater number of minor daily irritants. The existence of either predictor alone is not sufficient to perpetrate this functional somatic symptom; it requires the combination of these predictors.

Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to evaluate the usefulness of three self-administered screening instruments in helping primary care physicians detect anxiety and depressive disorders. This research was secondary to an investigation of hypochondriasis. The three tests were the Whitely Index (WI), the Somatosensory Amplification Scale (SAS), and the Somatic Symptom Inventory (SSI). Participating subjects were 75 patients seen in a general medical clinic and diagnosed as being free of hypochondriasis by DSM-III-R criteria. Psychiatric disorder was assessed with the Diagnostic Interview Schedule, version III-A. The three instruments delineated patients with depressive disorders versus no depressive disorders and patients with anxiety disorders versus no anxiety disorders. For depressive disorder, the areas under the curve (AUC) were 0.87, 0.75, and 0.82 for the WI, SAS, and SSI, respectively. For anxiety disorders the AUCs were 0.79, 0.76, and 0.74, respectively, for the three tests. Although the WI yielded slightly higher values, the areas under the ROC curves did not differ significantly among the three tests. Because of its relatively short length--13 items--it was concluded that the WI can be useful for screening primary care patients, both with respect to depressive and anxiety disorders.

We compared the screening accuracy of a short, five-item version of the Mental Health Inventory (MHI-5) with that of the 18-item MHI, the 30-item version of the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-30), and a 28-item Somatic Symptom Inventory (SSI-28). Subjects were newly enrolled members of a health maintenance organization (HMO), and the criterion diagnoses were those found through use of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS) in a stratified sample of respondents to an initial, mailed GHQ. To compare questionnaires, we used receiver operating characteristic analysis, comparing areas under curves through the method of Hanley and McNeil. The MHI-5 was as good as the MHI-18 and the GHQ-30, and better than the SSI-28, for detecting most significant DIS disorders, including major depression, affective disorders generally, and anxiety disorders. Areas under curve for the MHI-5 ranged from 0.739 (for anxiety disorders) to 0.892 (for major depression). Single items from the MHI also performed well. In this population, short screening questionnaires, and even single items, may detect the majority of people with DIS disorders while incurring acceptably low false-positive rates. Perhaps such extremely short questionnaires could more commonly reach use in actual practice than the longer versions have so far, permitting earlier assessment and more appropriate treatment of psychiatrically troubled patients in primary care settings.

Ninety-two general medical outpatients were surveyed with an interview, questionnaires, and a medical record review to investigate the relationships among psychiatric disorder (depression and hypochondriasis), somatic symptoms, medical morbidity, and the utilization of ambulatory medical services. Medical utilization correlated with the number of somatic symptoms reported (r = 0.49, P = 0.0001), depressive symptoms (r = 0.34, P = 0.001), and the number of medical diagnoses in the medical record. Somatic symptoms were not significantly correlated with the number of medical diagnoses, but were related to hypochondriacal attitudes (r = 0.52, P = 0.0001) and depression (r = 0.51, P = 0.0001). In stepwise multiple regressions, the number of medical diagnoses accounted for 33% of the variance in medical utilization. Somatic symptoms were the second most powerful predictor, increasing R2 to 0.469. The next best predictors were two hypochondriacal attitudes and the presence of a major psychiatric diagnosis in the medical record. This five-step model explained 56% of the variance. Somatic symptoms are thus powerful determinants of medical utilization, even after controlling for medical morbidity. Depression, disease fear, and bodily preoccupation are also important predictors of utilization. Somatic symptoms are a final common pathway through which emotional disturbance, psychiatric disorder, and organ pathology all express themselves, and which prompt patients to visit doctors.

Primary care physicians provide a large proportion of psychiatric care today, especially for elderly persons with limited resources and concomitant medical diseases. To determine the frequency and type of psychiatric care provided by internists, the experience of a large academic group practice was studied. Depression was the most frequent psychiatric diagnosis among persons over 59 years of age and the fifth most common of all diagnoses made by physicians. Consultations with psychiatrists were infrequent and were used primarily for confirmation of the diagnosis. Physicians generally treated the depression with supportive counseling and often employed pharmacologic therapy with tricyclic antidepressants. Elderly patients were less likely than younger patients to receive tricyclic antidepressants, and they received lower doses. The observed response to antidepressant drugs was positive but required at least 50 mg to be taken daily. Side effects were frequent, especially at doses greater than 100 mg/d, but generally not severe.

Self-administered screening questionnaires are available to assist primary care physicians in detecting undiagnosed depression and anxiety disorders. This study used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to evaluate three such tests: the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), the Mental Health Inventory (MHI), and the Somatic Symptom Inventory (SSI). Stratified by the results of a preliminary GHQ, 364 health maintenance organization (HMO) members were given these tests and a Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS), the latter used as a "truth" standard for current psychiatric diagnosis. The MHI performed significantly better than the GHQ in detecting mental disorders generally and anxiety disorders in particular, and somewhat better in detecting affective disorders. The SSI performed best in detecting anxiety disorders and was significantly better than the GHQ. When subjects who had participated in a previous study involving repeated GHQ administration were excluded, sensitivity of all tests improved, especially the GHQ. We conclude that the MHI can be a useful tool for screening primary care patients, and that the SSI has additional predictive value with respect to anxiety disorders.