Aspects of abnormal illness behavior.

MB, ChB, MD, DPM, FRANZCP, FRCPsych, FRACP, FASSA, AM, Professor and Head, Department of Psychiatry, University of Adelaide, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia.
Indian Journal of Psychiatry 07/1993; 35(3):145-50.
Source: PubMed
1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract The Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research (DCPR) were introduced in 1995 by an international group of investigators to expand the traditional domains of the disease model. The DCPR are a set of 12 'psychosomatic syndromes' which provide operational tools for psychosocial variables with prognostic and therapeutic implications in clinical settings. Eight syndromes concern the main manifestations of abnormal illness behaviour: somatization, hypochondriacal fears and beliefs, and illness denial. The other four syndromes (alexithymia, type A behaviour, demoralization and irritable mood) refer to the domain of psychological factors affecting medical conditions. This review describes the conceptual bases of the DCPR and the main findings concerning their application, with particular reference to the incremental information they added to the customary psychiatric classification. The DCPR were also compared with the provisional DSM-5 somatic symptom disorders. The DCPR were found to be more sensitive than DSM-IV in identifying subthreshold psychological distress and characterizing patients' psychological response to medical illness. DSM-5 somatic symptom disorders seem to neglect important clinical phenomena, such as illness denial, resulting in a narrow view of patients' functioning. The additional information provided by the DCPR may enhance the decision-making process.
    International Review of Psychiatry 02/2013; 25(1):19-30. DOI:10.3109/09540261.2012.726923 · 1.80 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many patients who consult their GP are worried about their health, but there is little empirical data on strategies for effective reassurance. To gain a better understanding of mechanisms for effective patient reassurance, we explored cognitions underlying patients' worries, cognitions underlying reassurance and factors supporting patients' reassuring cognitions. In a qualitative study, we conducted stimulated recall interviews with 21 patients of 12 different GPs shortly after their consultation. We selected consultations in which the GPs aimed to reassure worried patients and used their videotaped consultation as a stimulus for the interview. The interviews were analysed with thematic coding and by writing interpretive summaries. Patients expressed four different core cognitions underlying their concerns: 'I have a serious illness', 'my health problem will have adverse physical effects', 'my treatment will have adverse effects' and 'my health problem will negatively impact my life'. Patients mentioned a range of person-specific and context-specific cognitions as reasons for these core cognitions. Patients described five core reassuring cognitions: 'I trust my doctor's expertise', 'I have a trusting and supporting relationship with my doctor', 'I do not have a serious disease', 'my health problem is harmless' and 'my health problem will disappear.' Factors expressed as reasons for these reassuring cognitions were GPs' actions during the consultation as well as patients' pre-existing cognitions about their GP, the doctor-patient relationship and previous events. Patients' worrying cognitions were counterbalanced by specific reassuring cognitions, i.e. worrying and reassuring cognitions seemed to be interrelated. Patients described a wide range of worrying cognitions, some of which were not expressed during the consultation. Gaining a thorough understanding of the specific cognitions and tailoring reassuring strategies to them should be an effective way of achieving reassurance. The identified reassuring cognitions can guide doctors in applying these strategies in their daily practice.
    BMC Family Practice 04/2014; 15(1):73. DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-15-73 · 1.74 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Noncompliance remains one of the greatest challenges when prescribing psychotropic medication and can render any treatment regimen wasteful and ineffective. While rates reported in studies of noncompliance vary widely, noncompliance can clearly increase treatment costs and prolong the duration of hospitalisation. Furthermore, noncompliance has a human cost in terms of morbidity and mortality.The reasons for noncompliance can be divided into 3 categories: medication-, patient- and provider-specific factors. Adverse effects are likely to be the most common reason for patients to not comply with prescribed medication regimens. Ineffectiveness, complexity of the regimen and cost are also important medication-related factors contributing to noncompliance. The use of newer effective medications that have fewer adverse effects, drug holidays and low-dose treatment strategies may ameliorate adverse effects. In addition, the aggressive treatment of adverse effects such as antipsychotic-induced extrapyramidal syndromes and akathisia and tricyclic antidepressant-induced anticholinergic effects can increase compliance. In some cases, the complexity of regimens and the cost of medications can be reduced.The symptoms of a psychiatric disorder, the presence of substance abuse, and culture and attitude are patient-specific factors that may interfere with compliance. Noncompliance related to patient attitudes can be remedied through improving the patient-provider relationship, using depot antipsychotics and possibly medicating patients by force of judicial orders. Treatment of dual diagnosis, greater understanding of a patient's culture and the involvement of families in treatment can all be used to foster increased compliance. Psychosocial rehabilitation can also help increase compliance.Noncompliance increases when practitioners' views of their patients' prognosis or the effectiveness of treatment differ from that of their patients. How physicians communicate and what information they present to their patients and families plays a significant role in determining compliance. Physicians who believe in the medications they are prescribing and actively involve their patients in treatment decisions are likely to increase compliance. Expressing an understanding, empathic and caring manner will further promote compliance. Compliance should increase when good and clear lines of communication exist and patients feel free to ask questions. Specialised treatment options that practitioners can use to increase compliance include education, cognitive behavioural interventions, behaviour modification techniques, and using direct rewards for compliance. Psychotherapy can also be used as a tool to improve the practitioner-patient relationship.
    CNS Drugs 05/1998; 9(6):457-471. DOI:10.2165/00023210-199809060-00004 · 4.38 Impact Factor


Available from