Female sex and femininity independently associate with common somatic symptom trajectories

BACKGROUND: Multiple predictors have been associated with persistent somatic symptoms. However, previous studies problematically defined the persistence of symptoms, conflated participants' sex and gender, and focused on patient populations. Therefore, we studied associations between predictors, especially sex and gender, and longitudinal patterns of somatic symptoms in the general adult population. We also assessed whether predictors for persisting symptoms differ between sexes. METHOD: To identify developmental trajectories of somatic symptoms, assessed by the SCL-90 SOM, we used latent class trajectory modeling in the Dutch Lifelines Cohort Study [N = 150 494; 58.6% female; median time to follow-up: 46.0 (min-max: 22.0-123.0) months]. To identify predictors of trajectories, we applied multiple logistic regression analyses. Predictors were measured by surveys at baseline and a composite gender index was previously developed. RESULTS: A five-class linear LCGA model fitted the data best: 93.7% of the population had a stable symptom trajectory, whereas 1.5% and 4.8% of the population had a consistently increasing or decreasing symptom trajectory, respectively. Female sex predicted severe, stable symptom severity (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.36-2.22), but not increasing symptom severity (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.99-1.40). Femininity was protective hereof (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44-0.82 and OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.51-0.85, respectively). Merely a few predictors of symptom severity, for instance hours of paid employment and physical functioning, differed in strength between sexes. Yet, effect sizes were small. CONCLUSION: Female sex and femininity predict symptom trajectories. No large sex differences in the strength of additional predictors were found, thus it may not be clinically useful to distinguish between predictors specific to male or female patients of persistent somatic symptoms

Transitions in Parkinson's disease in primary care: Protocol of a longitudinal mixed methods study

Introduction: Parkinson's disease affects many aspects of the lives of patients and their relatives. Patients must adapt continuously to disabilities that necessitate changes in (medical) support, such as domestic adjustments, involvement of (non) professional caregivers or admission to hospital. Such changes mark a transition: a transfer of a patient between levels or locations of care. Transitions are likely to be multifold and complex, given that Parkinson's disease care extends across all echelons of healthcare. Patients and relatives are vulnerable during a transition, which imposes risks for their safety and quality of life. Guidance by the general practitioner, who knows the preferences of the patient, can help to overcome challenges associated with a transition. However, patient-centred primary care requires insight into the transitions patients with Parkinson's disease encounter. We aim to examine these transitions and the way patients, relatives and general practitioners experience them and cope with them. Moreover, we will study the patients' expectations of their general practitioner during a transition and the general practitioners' views on their role. Methods and analysis: A longitudinal mixed methods study will be conducted, using qualitative research methods combined with quantitative data as a validated questionnaire on quality of life. Patients will be asked to make a video diary every 2 weeks for a period of 1 year. Once they encounter a transition, patients and their general practitioners will be interviewed to identify causes and consequences of the transition. The verbatim transcripts of the videos and interviews will be analysed according to the principles of constant comparative analysis. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was not needed according to Dutch legislation. Informed consent of patients, relatives and general practitioners will be obtained. We will disseminate the results in peer-reviewed journals, at research conferences and on the website of the Dutch Parkinson's Disease Association

Do women and men use language differently in spoken face-to-face interaction? A scoping review

Although the question of whether women and men speak differently is a topic of hot debate, an overview of the extent towhich empirical studies provide robust support for a relationship between sex/gender and language is lacking. Therefore, the aim of the current scoping review is to synthesize recent studies from various theoretical perspectives on the relationship between sex/gender and language use in spoken face-to-face dyadic interactions. Fifteen empirical studies were systematically selected for review, and were discussed according to four different theoretical perspectives and associated methodologies. More than thirty relevant linguistic variables were identified (e.g., interruptions and intensifiers). Overall, few robust differences between women and men in the use of linguistic variables were observed across contexts, although women seem to be more engaged in supportive turn-taking than men. Importantly, gender identity salience, institutionalized roles, and social and contextual factors such as interactional setting or conversational goal seem to play a key role in the relationship between speaker’s sex/gender and language used in spoken interaction

Sex differences in the trajectories to diagnosis of patients presenting with common somatic symptoms in primary care:an observational cohort study

Objective: Little insight exists into sex differences in diagnostic trajectories for common somatic symptoms. This study aims to quantify sex differences in the provided primary care diagnostic interventions for common somatic symptoms, as well as the consequences hereof for final diagnoses. Methods: In this observational cohort study, we used real-world clinical data from the Dutch Family Medicine Network (N = 34,268 episodes of care related to common somatic symptoms; 61,4% female). The association between patients' sex on the one hand, and diagnostic interventions and disease diagnoses on the other hand, were assessed using multilevel multiple logistic regression analyses. Structural equation modelling was used to estimate a mediation model with multiple parallel mediators to assess whether the fewer disease diagnoses given to female patients were mediated by the fewer diagnostic interventions female patients receive, compared to male patients. Results: Women received fewer physical examinations (OR = 0.84, 95%CI = 0.79-0.89), diagnostic imaging (OR = 0.92, 95%CI = 0.84-0.99) and specialist referrals (OR = 0.85, 95%CI = 0.79-0.91) than men, but more laboratory diagnostics (OR = 1.27, 95%CI = 1.19-1.35). Women received disease diagnoses less often than men for their common somatic symptoms (OR = 0.94, 95%CI = 0.89-0.98). Mediation analysis showed that the fewer disease diagnosis in female patients were mediated by the fewer diagnostic interventions conducted in women compared to men. Conclusion: This study shows that sex inequalities are present in primary care diagnostic trajectories of patients with common somatic symptoms and that these lead to unequal health outcomes in terms of diagnoses between women and men. FPs have to be aware of these inequalities to ensure equal high-quality care for all patients

Gender and sex independently associate with common somatic symptoms and lifetime prevalence of chronic disease

Contains fulltext : 225526.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)Sex and gender influence health differently. Associations between sex and health have been extensively studied, but gender (i.e. psychosocial sex) has been largely neglected, partly due to the absence of gender measures in cohort studies. Therefore, our objective was to test the unique associations of gender and sex with common somatic symptoms and chronic diseases, using a gender index created from existing cohort data. We applied LASSO logistic regression to identify, out of 153 unique variables, psychosocial variables that were predictive of sex (i.e. gender-related) in the Dutch LifeLines Cohort Study. These psychosocial variables covered gender roles and institutionalized gender. Using the estimated coefficients, gender indexes were calculated for each adult participant in the study (n = 152,728; 58.5% female; mean age 44.6 (13.1) years). We applied multiple ordinal and logistic regression to test the unique associations of the gender index and sex, and their interactions, with common somatic symptoms assessed by the SCL-90 SOM and self-reported lifetime prevalence of chronic diseases, respectively. We found that in 10.1% of the participants the gender index was not in line with participants' sex: 12.5% of men and 8.4% of women showed a discrepancy between gender index and sex. Feminine gender characteristics are associated with increased common somatic symptoms and chronic diseases, especially in men. Female sex is associated with a higher common somatic symptom burden, but not with a higher prevalence of chronic diseases. The study shows that gender and sex uniquely impact health, and should be considered in epidemiological studies. Our methodology shows that consideration of gender measures in studies is necessary and feasible, based on data generally present in cohort studies

Sex Differences in Incidence of Respiratory Symptoms and Management by General Practioners

Background: Differences between women and men play an important role in lung physiology and epidemiology of respiratory diseases, but also in the health care processes. Objective: To analyse sex differences in patients encountering their general practitioner (GP) with respiratory symptoms with regard to incidence, GP's management and final diagnoses. Methods: Retrospective cohort study, using data of the Dutch Practice Based Research Network. All patients who encountered their GP from 01-07-2013 until 30-06-2018 with a new episode of care starting with a reason for encounter in the respiratory category (R) of the ICPC-2 classification were included (n = 16 773). Multi-level logistic regression was used to analyse influence of patients' sex on management of GPs with adjustment for possible confounders. Results: We found a significant higher incidence of respiratory symptoms in women than in men: 230/1000 patient years [95% confidence interval (CI) 227-232] and 186/1000 patient years (95% CI 183-189), respectively. When presenting with cough, GPs are more likely to perform physical examination [odds ratio (OR) 1.22; 95% CI 1.11-1.35] and diagnostic radiology (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.08-1.44), but less likely to prescribe medication (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.95) in men. When visiting the GP with dyspnoea, men more often undergo diagnostic imaging (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.05-1.66) and are more often referred to a specialist (OR 1.35; 95% CI 1.13-1.62). Conclusions: Women encounter their GP more frequently with respiratory symptoms than men and GPs perform more diagnostic investigations in men. We suggest more research in general practice focussing on sex differences and possible confounders

Development of a blended communication training program for managing medically unexplained symptoms in primary care using the intervention mapping approach

Background: General practice (GP) training in how to communicate with patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) is limited. Objective: Development, implementation and evaluation of an evidence-based communication training program for GP residents focused on patients with MUS in primary care. Methods: We used the intervention mapping (IM) framework to systematically develop the MUS training program. We conducted a needs assessment to formulate change objectives and identified teaching methods for a MUS communication training program. Next, we developed, implemented and evaluated the training program with 46 residents by assessing their self-efficacy and by exploring their experiences with the training. Results: The resulting program is a blended training with an online course and two training days. After attending the training program, GP residents reported significantly higher self-efficacy for communication with patients with MUS at four weeks follow up compared to baseline. Furthermore, GP residents experienced the training program as useful and valued the combination of the online course and training days. Conclusion and practice implications: We developed an evidence-based communication training program for the management of patients with MUS in primary care. Future research should examine the effect of the training on GP residents' communication skills in MUS consultations in daily practice. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V

Explanations for medically unexplained symptoms:a qualitative study on GPs in daily practice consultations

BACKGROUND: General practice is the centre of care for patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). Providing explanations for MUS, i.e. making sense of symptoms, is considered to be an important part of care for MUS patients. However, little is known how general practitioners (GPs) do this in daily practice. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore how GPs explain MUS to their patients during daily general practice consultations. METHODS: A thematic content analysis was performed of how GPs explained MUS to their patients based on 39 general practice consultations involving patients with MUS. RESULTS: GP provided explanations in nearly all consultations with MUS patients. Seven categories of explanation components emerged from the data: defining symptoms, stating causality, mentioning contributing factors, describing mechanisms, excluding explanations, discussing the severity of symptoms and normalizing symptoms. No pattern of how GPs constructed explanations with the various categories was observed. In general, explanations were communicated as a possibility and in a patient-specific way; however, they were not very detailed. CONCLUSION: Although explanations for MUS are provided in most MUS consultations, there seems room for improving the explanations given in these consultations. Further studies on the effectiveness of explanations and on the interaction between patients and GP in constructing these explanations are required in order to make MUS explanations more suitable in daily primary care practice

The diagnostic pathway of Parkinson's disease: A cross-sectional survey study of factors influencing patient dissatisfaction

Background: The diagnostic pathway of Parkinson’s disease (PD) is often complicated. Experiences during this pathway can affect patients’ satisfaction and their confidence and trust in healthcare providers. Although healthcare providers cannot influence the impact of the diagnosis, they can influence how patients experience the pathway. This study, therefore, aims to provide insight into PD patients’ dissatisfaction with the diagnostic pathway and to describe the factors that influence it. Methods: We carried out a cross-sectional survey study among 902 patient members of the Dutch Parkinson’s Disease Association, who were each asked to write an essay about their diagnostic pathway. A coding format was developed to examine the content of these essays. Inter-observer agreement on coding patient dissatisfaction was calculated using Cohen’s kappa. The χ2 test and a multivariable logistic regression analysis were performed to assess the relation between dissatisfaction and sex, level of education, duration of the pathway, communication with the general practitioner (GP) and the neurologist, the number of healthcare providers involved, whether or not a second opinion had taken place (including the person who initiated it) and diagnostic delay (taking into consideration who caused the delay according to the patient). A subgroup analysis was performed to gain insight into sex-related differences. Results: Of all patients, 16.4% explicitly described they were dissatisfied with the diagnostic pathway, whereas 4.8% were very satisfied. The inter-observer agreement on coding dissatisfaction was κ = 0.82. The chance of dissatisfaction increased with a lower level of education, the involvement of more than one additional healthcare provider, a second opinion initiated by the patient and delay caused by a healthcare provider. When only the GP and the neurologist were involved, women were more likely to be dissatisfied than men. Conclusions: PD patients’ dissatisfaction with the diagnostic pathway is related to a lower level of education, a second opinion initiated by the patient and experienced diagnostic delay. GPs can positively influence patients’ experiences if they are aware of these risk factors for dissatisfaction and pay extra attention to communication and shared decision making. This will contribute to a trusting therapeutic relationship that is indispensable with progression of the diseaseThis study was supported by funds of the Dutch Parkinson’s Disease Association (Funding number 2012-V15) and the Health Insurers Innovation Foundation (Funding number 2687)