Presentation of the Multidisciplinary Guideline Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms (MUPS) and Somatoform Disorder in the Netherlands: Disease management according to risk profiles

Feltz-Cornelis, Christina M. van der; Hoedeman, Rob; Keuter, Emile; Swinkels, J. A.

doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2011.11.007

Cited by 72 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, a fear of missing a serious illness was a highly cited theme in our review and appeared to underpin other barriers such as PCPs focussing on somatic interventions [38] and their intolerance of uncertainty [65]. As suggested in the introduction to the Dutch, and in the German guidelines, we therefore support a "parallel" track diagnosis which investigates linked physical and psychological components simultaneously [10,14]. A multifactorial understanding should be emphasised which would encompass all contributing aspects, of non-specific, functional and somatoform complaints.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…Given their often on-going relationship with patients and their role as being the 'first contact' [11], PCPs are in the perfect position to monitor patients' health behaviour over time and be cognisant of all these potential contributing factors. Diagnostic guidelines recommend, therefore, that PCPs should manage and co-ordinate care of patients with somatoform type complaints [10,[12][13][14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The challenge of diagnosing non-specific, functional, and somatoform disorders: A systematic review of barriers to diagnosis in primary care

Murray

Toussaint

Althaus

et al. 2016

Journal of Psychosomatic Research

121

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The challenge of diagnosing non-specific, functional, and somatoform disorders: A systematic review of barriers to diagnosis in primary care

Murray

Toussaint

Althaus

et al. 2016

Journal of Psychosomatic Research

121

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These include several national guidelines and Cochrane reviews for bodily distress and many systematic and Cochrane reviews for single FSS. These reviews identified the moderate benefits of various treatments, but they also highlighted the unmet treatment needs of this large group of patients by describing the barriers to better diagnosis and treatment [2,66,67,68,69,70,71]. We focus here on the management approach to the single patient, but the systemic public health aspects of this clinical problem and the reduction of barriers to better management at this systemic level are also of great importance [2].…”

Section: Management Of Fss and Bodily Distressmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of Functional Somatic Syndromes and Bodily Distress

Henningsen

Zipfel²,

Sattel³

et al. 2018

Psychother Psychosom

242

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Functional somatic syndromes (FSS), like irritable bowel syndrome or fibromyalgia and other symptoms reflecting bodily distress, are common in practically all areas of medicine worldwide. Diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to these symptoms and syndromes vary substantially across and within medical specialties from biomedicine to psychiatry. Patients may become frustrated with the lack of effective treatment, doctors may experience these disorders as difficult to treat, and this type of health problem forms an important component of the global burden of disease. This review intends to develop a unifying perspective on the understanding and management of FSS and bodily distress. Firstly, we present the clinical problem and review current concepts for classification. Secondly, we propose an integrated etiological model which encompasses a wide range of biopsychosocial vulnerability and triggering factors and considers consecutive aggravating and maintaining factors. Thirdly, we systematically scrutinize the current evidence base in terms of an umbrella review of systematic reviews from 2007 to 2017 and give recommendations for treatment for all levels of care, concentrating on developments over the last 10 years. We conclude that activating, patient-involving, and centrally acting therapies appear to be more effective than passive ones that primarily act on peripheral physiology, and we recommend stepped care approaches that translate a truly biopsychosocial approach into actual management of the patient.

show abstract

“…The recently published primary care guideline on MUS, based on the Multidisciplinary Guideline Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms (MUPS) and Somatoform Disorders, 7 is, as far as we know, the first evidence-based guideline on MUS in primary care. In this primary care guideline, MUS is considered to be a working hypothesis based on the (justified) assumption that somatic and/or psychiatric pathology is adequately excluded.…”

Section: Guiding a Stepped Care Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%