A strong association between non-musculoskeletal symptoms and musculoskeletal pain symptoms: results from a population study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is a lack of knowledge about the pattern of symptom reporting in the general population as most research focuses on specific diseases or symptoms. The number of musculoskeletal pain sites is a strong predictor for disability pensioning and, hence, is considered to be an important dimension in symptom reporting. The simple method of counting symptoms might also be applicable to non-musculoskeletal symptoms, rendering further dimensions in describing individual and public health. In a general population, we aimed to explore the association between self-reported non-musculoskeletal symptoms and the number of pain sites.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>With a cross-sectional design, the Standardised Nordic Questionnaire and the Subjective Health Complaints Inventory were used to record pain at ten different body sites and 13 non-musculoskeletal symptoms, respectively, among seven age groups in Ullensaker, Norway (n = 3,227).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Results showed a strong, almost linear relationship between the number of non-musculoskeletal symptoms and the number of pain sites (r = 0.55). The <it>number </it>and <it>type </it>of non-musculoskeletal symptoms had an almost equal explanatory power in the number of pain sites reported (27.1% vs. 28.2%).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The linear association between the number of non-musculoskeletal and musculoskeletal symptoms might indicate that the symptoms share common characteristics and even common underlying causal factors. The total burden of symptoms as determined by the number of symptoms reported might be an interesting generic indicator of health and well-being, as well as present and future functioning. Research on symptom reporting might also be an alternative pathway to describe and, possibly, understand the medically unexplained multisymptom conditions.</p

Recognition of patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms by family physicians: results of a focus group study

BACKGROUND: Patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) form a heterogeneous group and frequently attend their family physician (FP). Little is known about how FPs recognize MUPS in their patients. We conducted a focus group study to explore how FPs recognize MUPS and whether they recognize specific subgroups of patients with MUPS. Targeting such subgroups might improve treatment outcomes. METHODS: Six focus groups were conducted with in total 29 Dutch FPs. Two researchers independently analysed the data applying the principles of constant comparative analysis in order to detect characteristics to recognize MUPS and to synthesize subgroups. RESULTS: FPs take into account various characteristics when recognizing MUPS in their patients. More objective characteristics were multiple MUPS, frequent and long consultations and many referrals. Subjective characteristics were negative feelings towards patients and the feeling that the FP cannot make sense of the patient's story. Experience of the FP, affinity with MUPS, consultation skills, knowledge of the patient's context and the doctor-patient relationship seemed to influence how and to what extent these characteristics play a role. Based on the perceptions of the FPs we were able to distinguish five subgroups of patients according to FPs: 1) the anxious MUPS patient, 2) the unhappy MUPS patient, 3) the passive MUPS patient, 4) the distressed MUPS patient, and 5) the puzzled MUPS patient. These subgroups were not mutually exclusive, but were based on how explicit and predominant certain characteristics were perceived by FPs. CONCLUSIONS: FPs believe that they can properly identify MUPS in their patients during consultations and five distinct subgroups of patients could be distinguished. If these subgroups can be confirmed in further research, personalized treatment strategies can be developed and tested for their effectiveness

Factors related to self-rated health: a survey among patients and their general practitioners

AbstractObjective To explore associations between general practice patients’ SRH and symptoms, diagnoses, chronic conditions, unexplained conditions, and life stressors.Design A cross-sectional study. Data were collected from GP and patient questionnaires.Setting General practices in Southeast Norway.Subjects 47 general practitioners (GPs) who included 866 consecutive patients.Main outcome measures SRH was measured with a single question from the COOP-WONCA overall health chart and dichotomized into good/poor SRH. Binary logistic regression models were used in the analyses.Results Poor SRH was reported by 48% of the patients in the past week. A higher prevalence of poor SRH was found for women, middle-aged, recipients of social security grants, patients diagnosed with asthenia, lower back pain, and depression/anxiety, and for patients with reported life stressors and unexplained conditions. We found an almost linear association between the number of symptoms and the likelihood of reporting poor SRH. The probability of reporting poor SRH increased along with an increasing number of symptoms for common diagnoses. In a multivariate analysis, the only number of symptoms, being in receipt of social security grants and being retired was associated with poor SRH.Conclusion The likelihood of reporting poor SRH increased with an increasing number of symptoms, partly independent of the diagnosis given by GPs. This result coincides with our previous findings of a strong association between the number of symptoms, function, and health. The symptom burden thus appears to be an important factor for SRH among patients in general practice.KEY POINTSThere is a high prevalence of poor SRH in general practice patients.The likelihood of reporting poor SRH is partly independent of the diagnosis given.The number of symptoms was the factor strongest associated with poor SRH

Medievalism, Modernity and Memory: Cropthorne Church, 1892–1910

Recorded in the Domesday Survey for Worcestershire (1086), the Church of St. Michael in Cropthorne, Worcestershire is an ancient building with a rich history. Drawing on surviving manuscript and visual sources, this article examines the repairs, restoration and refurbishments made to the interior of St. Michael’s between 1890 and 1910. This was a period in which the ownership of the village shifted from the Anglican Church to private patronage and a time which witnessed many changes to the fabric of the building; notably the extensive refurbishments carried out to the chancel in 1894 by Francis Holland, the Lord of the Manor and the restoration of the rest of Cropthorne church which took more than eighteen years to complete. Highlighting the significance of the Church in rural areas as a place for personal and community memory, this article will consider how these changes to a sacred space used for communal worship were linked to the social changes experienced by the rural community that worshipped within it: moving beyond a purely architectural survey of the building, it will identify the agents of these changes; the processes involved in accomplishing them; and, responses to these alterations. Consequently, the alterations and additions to the interior of St. Michael’s made at the instigation and expense both of the Holland Family of Cropthorne Court and the people of Cropthorne will be analyzed in the context of the changing religious, technological, social, economic and political conditions of the period, which include the effects of the Agricultural Depression and the devastating impact of war