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

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

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)

Explanation and relations. How do general practitioners deal with patients with persistent medically unexplained symptoms: a focus group study

Contains fulltext : 80758.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Persistent presentation of medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) is troublesome for general practitioners (GPs) and causes pressure on the doctor-patient relationship. As a consequence, GPs face the problem of establishing an ongoing, preferably effective relationship with these patients. This study aims at exploring GPs' perceptions about explaining MUS to patients and about how relationships with these patients evolve over time in daily practice. METHODS: A qualitative approach, interviewing a purposive sample of twenty-two Dutch GPs within five focus groups. Data were analyzed according to the principles of constant comparative analysis. RESULTS: GPs recognise the importance of an adequate explanation of the diagnosis of MUS but often feel incapable of being able to explain it clearly to their patients. GPs therefore indicate that they try to reassure patients in non-specific ways, for example by telling patients that there is no disease, by using metaphors and by normalizing the symptoms. When patients keep returning with MUS, GPs report the importance of maintaining the doctor-patient relationship. GPs describe three different models to do this; mutual alliance characterized by ritual care (e.g. regular physical examination, regular doctor visits) with approval of the patient and the doctor, ambivalent alliance characterized by ritual care without approval of the doctor and non-alliance characterized by cutting off all reasons for encounter in which symptoms are not of somatic origin. CONCLUSION: GPs feel difficulties in explaining the symptoms. GPs report that, when patients keep presenting with MUS, they focus on maintaining the doctor-patient relationship by using ritual care. In this care they meticulously balance between maintaining a good doctor-patient relationship and the prevention of unintended consequences of unnecessary interventions

Sex and Gender-Related Differences in COVID-19 Diagnoses and SARS-CoV-2 Testing Practices During the First Wave of the Pandemic:The Dutch Lifelines COVID-19 Cohort Study

Background: Although sex differences are described in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnoses and testing, many studies neglect possible gender-related influences. Additionally, research is often performed in clinical populations, while most COVID-19 patients are not hospitalized. Therefore, we investigated associations between sex and gender-related variables, and COVID-19 diagnoses and testing practices in a large general population cohort during the first wave of the pandemic when testing capacity was limited. Methods: We used data from the Lifelines COVID-19 Cohort (N = 74,722; 60.8% female). We applied bivariate and multiple logistic regression analyses. The outcomes were a COVID-19 diagnosis (confirmed by SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing or physician's clinical diagnosis) and PCR testing. Independent variables included among others participants' sex, age, somatic comorbidities, occupation, and smoking status. Sex-by-comorbidity and sex-by-occupation interaction terms were included to investigate sex differences in associations between the presence of comorbidities or an occupation with COVID-19 diagnoses or testing practices. Results: In bivariate analyses female sex was significantly associated with COVID-19 diagnoses and testing, but significance did not persist in multiple logistic regression analyses. However, a gender-related variable, being a health care worker, was significantly associated with COVID-19 diagnoses (OR = 1.68; 95%CI = 1.30-2.17) and testing (OR = 12.5; 95%CI = 8.55-18.3). Female health care workers were less often diagnosed and tested than male health care workers (ORinteraction = 0.54; 95%CI = 0.32-0.92, ORinteraction = 0.53; 95%CI = 0.29-0.97, respectively). Conclusions: We found no sex differences in COVID-19 diagnoses and testing in the general population. Among health care workers, a male preponderance in COVID-19 diagnoses and testing was observed. This could be explained by more pronounced COVID-19 symptoms in males or by gender inequities