A controlled trial on the effect of hypnosis on dental anxiety in tooth removal patients.

OBJECTIVE: Empirical evidence concerning the efficacy of hypnosis to reduce anxiety in dental patients is limited. Hence we conducted a controlled trial in patients undergoing tooth removal. The study aims at assessing patient's attitude toward hypnosis and comparing the course of dental anxiety before, during and subsequent to tooth removal in patients with treatment as usual (TAU) and patients with treatment as usual and hypnosis (TAU+HYP). METHODS: 102 patients in a dental practice were assigned to TAU or TAU+HYP. Dental anxiety was assessed before, during and after treatment. All patients were asked about their experiences and attitudes toward hypnosis. RESULTS: More than 90% of patients had positive attitudes toward hypnosis. Dental anxiety was highest before treatment, and was decreasing across the three assessment points in both groups. The TAU+HYP group reported significantly lower levels of anxiety during treatment, but not after treatment compared with TAU group. CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm that hypnosis is beneficial as an adjunct intervention to reduce anxiety in patients undergoing tooth removal, particularly with regard to its no-invasive nature. PRACTICAL IMPLICATION: The findings underline that hypnosis is not only beneficial, but also highly accepted by the patients. Implementation of hypnosis in routine dental care should be forwarded.

[Review Model for the Assessment of Psychometric Instruments--Recommendations of the German College of Psychosomatic Medicine (DKPM)]. / Kriterienkatalog zur Beurteilung psychodiagnostischer Selbstbeurteilungsinstrumente--Empfehlung des Deutschen Kollegiums für Psychosomatische Medizin (DKPM).

OBJECTIVES: Psychometric instruments are commonly applied in psychotherapeutic research and care for the baseline assessment of symptoms, the planning of therapeutic interventions, the assessment of the longitudinal course of symptoms and outcomes of therapeutic interventions as well as quality management of care. Psychometric properties as well as economic aspects should be considered in the selection of specific instruments. It is assumed that users of psychometric instruments face a great variety of instruments and related information. For that reason, it seems challenging to absorb the current knowledge and to integrate it into clinical practice and research. Thus, it is likely that well-known, established and easily accessible instruments are commonly used, while new developed instruments might not be disseminated in research and healthcare. METHODS: Based on available international review models, the working group "Psychometrics and Psychodiagnostics" of the German College of Psychosomatic Medicine (DKPM) has developed and tested a review model specifically tailored for psychotherapeutic research and care. RESULTS: The different steps of development, as well as the final review model based on the consensus of the working group are presented. The review model contains 6 generic terms (reliability, validity, objectivity, reference groups and aspects of application) with 21 different criteria to be assessed with 0-3 asterisks (*). The criteria are clearly operationalized and the practical use of the review model is explained and discussed. CONCLUSIONS: With the review model for the assessment of psychometric instruments a well-defined evaluation system is made available for research and clinical practice which has been developed by an expert group. The review model facilitates systematic, transparent and comparative evaluation of psychometric instruments along clearly defined criteria. It also supports the selection of psychometric instruments in research and care. Next, the working group aims at disseminating and implementing the review model as well as the application and publication of reviews for different psychometric instruments based on the review model.

Traumatic experiences, alexithymia, and posttraumatic symptomatology: a cross-sectional population-based study in Germany.

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have established an association between number of traumatic experiences and alexithymia. The present study examines this relationship in a large-scale representative sample of the German general population (N=2,507) and explores the potential mediating effects of posttraumatic symptomatology, particularly avoidance/numbing. METHODS: Alexithymia was assessed with the German version of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Posttraumatic symptomatology was operationalized by the symptom score of the modified German version of the Posttraumatic Symptom Scale, and traumatic experiences were assessed with the trauma list of the Munich Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Two mediation analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Of the total sample, 24.2% (n=606) reported at least one traumatic experience, 10.6% (n=258) were classified as alexithymic, and 2.4% (n=59) fulfilled the criteria of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Participants who had survived five or more traumatic experiences had significantly higher alexithymia sum scores. The PTSD symptom cluster avoidance/numbing mediated the association between the number of traumatic experiences and alexithymia. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings illustrate an association between number of traumatic experiences and alexithymia and the influence of emotional avoidance and numbing within this relationship. The significant relationship between alexithymia and number of traumatic experiences in a general population sample further supports the concept of multiple and complex traumatization as associated with alexithymia. The results suggest the importance of further investigations determining the causal impact of alexithymia both as a potential premorbid trait and as consequence of traumatization. Lastly, future investigations are needed to clarify alexithymia as a distinct trauma-relevant characteristic for better diagnostics and specialized trauma-integrative therapy.

A comparison of the clinical features of fibromyalgia syndrome in different settings.

BACKGROUND: The "funnel hypothesis" of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) assumes that the high levels of somatic and psychological symptoms reported by FMS-patients are due to a selection bias of patients seeking for medical specialist care. We tested the hypothesis by comparing FMS-patients from a general population sample and different clinical settings. METHODS: From a cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of the German general population, persons meeting FMS-criteria were selected. Consecutive in- and outpatients from German rheumatology, pain medicine, psychosomatic medicine and integrative medicine settings with established or initial diagnosis of FMS were recruited. FMS was diagnosed in all samples by the survey criteria of the regional pain scale. Somatic symptom intensity was measured by 13 items of the Patient Health Questionnaire PHQ 15, depressed mood by the 9-items PHQ 9. RESULTS: 96 persons of the general population, 86 of the rheumatology, 80 of the pain medicine, 69 of the psychosomatic medicine and 58 of the integrative medicine setting were included into the comparison. Patients of the clinical settings reported more pain sites and more somatic and depressive symptoms than FMS-persons of the general population. Patients of the different clinical settings did not differ in the number of pain sites and the intensity of depressive and somatic symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: We found a "funnel" between FMS-persons of the general population and FMS-patients of clinical settings, but not between patients of different levels of care. Patients contacting the health care system did not differ in clinical features.

[Quantity versus quality: a review on current methodological dispute in health services research]. / Quantität versus Qualität: Zum Stand der Methodendebatte in der Versorgungsforschung.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the percentage of qualitative and quantitative research papers on health services research in two German journals. METHODS: All publications of the two journals were viewed. Only empirical research papers were included. It was then assessed whether they dealt with health services research and what methodology was used to collect and analyse data. RESULTS: About half of all published empirical papers dealt with health services research. Of those, slightly over 20 % used qualitative methods at least partially. Ordered by topic, qualitative data collection and analysis is especially common in the fields of phenomenology, treatment determinants and treatment outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Sole qualitative methodology is still used rather seldom in health services research. Attempts to include quantitative as well as qualitative approaches are limited to sequential design, lowering the independent value of both approaches. The concept of triangulation yields the possibility to overcome paradigm based dichotomies. However, the choice of methodology ought to be based primarily on the research question.