How the integration of normal medical test results can be improved in patients with somatoform disorders-An experimental study.

BACKGROUND: We examined whether the difficulties of patients with somatoform disorders (SFDs) in integrating medical reassurance can be altered by preventing patients from devaluing reassuring information through defensive cognitive strategies. METHOD: Patients with SFD (n = 60), patients with major depression (n = 32), and healthy volunteers (n = 37) watched a videotaped doctor's report, which provided medical reassurance for gastroenterological complaints. Subsequently, participants were asked about their perception of the report. In the SFD sample, patients' appraisal of the reassuring was experimentally modulated: In one condition, doubts about the validity of the doctor's diagnostic assessment were triggered; in another condition, the devaluation of medical reassurance was blocked through underscoring the validity of the doctor's diagnostic assessment; and a control condition received no manipulation. RESULTS: As evident on all outcome variables, patients with SFD had more difficulty integrating medical reassurance than depressed and healthy people. Within the SFD sample, participants from the experimental condition blocking the devaluation of medical reassurance rated the likelihood of an undetected serious disease to be significantly lower than the other two conditions. They also reported less emotional concern and a lower desire to seek the opinion of another doctor. CONCLUSIONS: By comparing patients with SFD to both a healthy and a clinical control group, the current study suggests that the difficulty in processing reassuring medical information is a specific psychopathological feature of SFD. Furthermore, our results suggest that the integration of medical reassurance can be improved by preventing patients from devaluing reassuring information through dismissive cognitive strategies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

A Rome Working Team Report on Brain-Gut Behavior Therapies for Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This Rome Foundation Working Team Report reflects the consensus of an international interdisciplinary team of experts regarding the use of behavioral interventions, specifically brain-gut behavior therapies (BGBTs), in patients with disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBIs). METHODS: The committee members reviewed the extant scientific literature and, when possible, addressed gaps in this literature through the lens of their clinical and scientific expertise. The Delphi method was used to create consensus on the goals, structure, and framework before writing the report. The report is broken into 5 parts: 1) definition and evidence for BGBT, 2) the gut-brain axis as the mechanistic basis for BGBT, 3) targets of BGBTs, 4) common and unique therapeutic techniques seen in BGBT, and 5) who and how to refer for BGBT. RESULTS: We chose to not only review for the reader the 5 existing classes of BGBT and their evidence, but to connect DGBI-specific behavioral targets and techniques as they relate directly, or in some cases indirectly, to the gut-brain axis. In doing so, we expect to increase gastrointestinal providers' confidence in identifying and referring appropriate candidates for BGBT and to support clinical decision making for mental health professionals providing BGBT. CONCLUSIONS: Both gastrointestinal medical providers and behavioral health providers have an opportunity to optimize care for DGBIs through a collaborative integrated approach that begins with an effective patient-provider relationship, thoughtful communication about the brain-gut axis and, when appropriate, a well communicated referral to BGBT.

Patient Perspective on Safety of Elective Gastrointestinal Endoscopy During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Patients' perception regarding the risks of COVID-19 infection with gastrointestinal (GI) and the preventive measures taken in GI endoscopy units to mitigate infection risk remains unclear. We aimed to assess patients' perception regarding risks of COVID-19 with GI endoscopy and the changes in the endoscopy unit as a result of the ongoing pandemic. METHODS: Outpatients undergoing GI endoscopy at our institution were categorized into those scheduled to undergo GI endoscopy (preprocedure) and those who had recently undergone GI endoscopy during the pandemic (postprocedure). Two separate but similar survey instruments were designed. Patients were asked to respond on a 5-point Likert scale. Responses were stratified as "low," "neutral," and "high" for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 150 and 355 respondents completed the preprocedure and postprocedure surveys, with a combined response rate of 82.5%. Non-white ethnicity was associated with reporting a "high" level of concern for endoscopy related COVID-19 exposure in both the preprocedure (OR 4.09, 95% CI 1.54-10.82) and postprocedure cohorts (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.04-4.29). 42% of patients in the preprocedure cohort and 11.8% in the postprocedure cohort reported their level of concern for COVID exposure as "high." Among the postprocedure cohort, 88% of the patients were likely to undergo repeat endoscopy during the pandemic if recommended. CONCLUSION: Patients are willing to undergo GI endoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Non-white and older patients, and those undergoing screening examinations were more concerned with the GI endoscopy related COVID-19 transmission risk.

Psychological Health Among Gastroenterologists During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Survey.

The COVID-19 pandemic poses unprecedented and unique challenges to gastroenterologists eager to maintain clinical practice, patients' health, and their own physical/mental well-being. We aimed to estimate the prevalence and critical determinants of psychological distress in gastroenterologists during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hope in Medicine: Applying Multidisciplinary Insights.

Hope is a crucial aspect of human life and has been a topic of interest in many scholarly disciplines. The medical literature, however, has-with a few exceptions-failed to take account of conceptions of hope across other scholarly disciplines. Before exploring what makes hope a distinctive and important phenomenon in medical contexts, this article reviews prominent views on hope from philosophy, anthropology, theology, and psychology. To synthesize these different conceptions, the authors propose an integrative approach aimed at improving the understanding of hope in medicine. The authors use a modes-of-hoping framework to explain different phenomena related to hope in medicine, such as hope in the face of a dismal prognosis, in the disclosure of diagnostic information, and in the initiation of new treatments. Based on this tentative framework, possible directions for future empirical research are discussed. Beside further qualitative research into the patients' and physicians' understanding and experiences of hope, the authors urge a quantitative examination of the impact of hope (while recognizing that a quantitative approach might not able to capture hope's many intricacies). Finally, they discuss clinical and ethical implications with respect to a balance between physicians being honest and acknowledging patients' hope.

Multicultural considerations in the diagnosis and management of irritable bowel syndrome: a selective summary.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common gastrointestinal disorder that is characterized by chronic and recurrent abdominal symptoms with no associated organic abnormalities. Although IBS has traditionally been considered to be more common in western cultures, a review of the literature reveals that IBS is truly a worldwide illness, affecting people in many different cultural and geographic areas. According to this review, a reasonable range for the worldwide prevalence of IBS is between 5 and 15%. Several theories for varying prevalence rates around the world are presented in this paper and methodological difficulties are discussed. Finally, this short review provides an analysis of cultural, biological, and socioeconomic differences in IBS presentation and treatment around the world.

Type, rather than number, of mental and physical comorbidities increases the severity of symptoms in patients with irritable bowel syndrome.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) has significant mental and physical comorbidities. However, little is known about the day-to-day burden these comorbidities place on quality of life (QOL), physical and mental function, distress, and symptoms of patients. METHODS: We collected cross-sectional data from 175 patients with IBS, which was diagnosed on the basis of Rome III criteria (median age, 41 years; 78% women), who were referred to 2 specialty care clinics. Patients completed psychiatric interviews, a physical comorbidity checklist, the IBS Symptom Severity Scale, the IBS-QOL instrument, the Brief Symptom Inventory, the abdominal pain intensity scale, and the Short Form-12 Health Survey. RESULTS: Patients with IBS reported an average of 5 comorbidities (1 mental, 4 physical). Subjects with more comorbidities reported worse QOL after adjusting for confounding variables. Multiple linear regression analyses indicated that comorbidity type was more consistently and strongly associated with illness burden indicators than disease counts. Of 10,296 possible physical-mental comorbidity pairs, 6 of the 10 most frequent dyads involved specific conditions (generalized anxiety, depression, back pain, agoraphobia, tension headache, and insomnia). These combinations were consistently associated with greater illness and symptom burdens (QOL, mental and physical function, distress, more severe symptoms of IBS, and pain). CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidities are common among patients with IBS. They are associated with distress and reduced QOL. Specific comorbidities are associated with more severe symptoms of IBS.