Criteria Of Somatic Symptom Disorder Research Articles

Applying the Somatic Symptom Disorder Diagnosis to Individuals with Fibromyalgia: Strengths and Limitations.

Amidst broad changes to the somatic disorder diagnoses, DSM-IV pain disorder was absorbed into DSM-5's somatic symptom disorder (SSD) as a specifier. However, clinical research testing of its use for the chronic pain population has been limited and its utility remains inconclusive. Using the exemplar of fibromyalgia, this article evaluates the validity, reliability, clinical utility, and acceptability of the SSD pain specifier. The diagnosis appears to have moderate validity but low specificity for the fibromyalgia population. The pain specifier has neither undergone sufficient field testing nor been evaluated for use by medical providers, with available data suggesting low reliability. Further research is needed to establish clinical utility via assessment of differential treatment outcomes. Concerns about social, legal, and economic consequences of classifying pain patients with a mental health diagnosis are outstanding. The current SSD criteria should be used with caution among the fibromyalgia patient population until its application for chronic pain has been further researched.

Psychobehavioral B-Criteria of Somatic Symptom Disorder Are Associated with Somatic Symptom Reporting in a Large Sample of Psychosomatic Outpatients

Plain Language SummaryThis scientific study examines the association between psychobehavioral factors and somatic symptom reporting in a large sample of psychosomatic outpatients. We investigated the association of established and possible additional psychobehavioral criteria for somatic symptom disorder (SSD) as defined in the DSM-V. The study included 6,491 patients from a psychosomatic outpatient center over a 12-year period. The participants completed self-report questionnaires to assess somatic symptom reporting and psychobehavioral factors. The results showed that the B-criteria of SSD were associated with somatic symptom reporting, indicating the validity of these criteria in clinical practice. Other psychobehavioral factors, such as depressive symptoms and impaired activity and participation, as well as sociodemographic factors such as age and gender were also associated with somatic symptom reporting but to a much lesser extent. This study has limitations, including its retrospective and cross-sectional design, reliance on self-report measures, and the need for further research using longitudinal data and clinician-rated assessments to complement self-report data. However, our research highlights the importance of psychological symptomatology in individuals who report somatic symptoms. These findings may inform future diagnostic criteria and treatment approaches for individuals with SSD and improve treatment and patient outcomes.

Effective prediction of somatic symptom disorder–B criteria in China: A case report

According to the diagnostic criteria for somatic symptom disorder (SSD) outlined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5th (DSM-5), there is a necessity for a rapid, simple, and effective diagnostic tool in the outpatient setting to predict the SSD–B criteria. This study aims to evaluate the screening diagnostic value of combining the duration of concern about physical discomfort per day with the Whiteley Index-8 (WI-8) scale. In a previous multicenter cross-sectional study, patients were recruited from outpatient clinics in general hospitals (n = 699). In this comparative study, we recruited an additional 100 patients from a psychosomatic outpatient unit. Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis was applied to obtain the optimal cutoff value for the time spent worrying about physical discomfort per day and the WI-8 scale. The analysis of both datasets reveals significant differences in the amount of time spent on symptoms per day between the groups. In the previous multicenter study, patients in the high-score group expressed more concern about physical discomfort than those in the low-score group (4.5 ± 4.8 h/day [h/d] vs. 0.9 ± 1.9 h/d; t = 13.943; P < 0.01). In the current comparative study (n = 100), the high-score group spent 5.3 ± 4.2 h/d worrying about physical symptoms, while the low-score group spent 2.3 ± 3.7 h/d. ROC curve analysis indicated that the cutoff value for time in the previous multicenter study was 1.25 h (area under the ROC curve [AUC] = 0.839), and the WI-8 scale score was 19 (AUC = 0.907). Combining the two increased the AUC–0.921 (P < 0.001). The cutoff value for time in the comparative study was 1.9 h (AUC = 0.801), and the WI-8 scale score was 11 (AUC = 0.925). Combining the two increased the AUC to 0.935 (P < 0.001). The combination of time and the WI-8 scale offers a simple, cost-effective, rapid, and direct method for clinical doctors to screen for somatic symptom disorders–B criteria.

Comparison of physical and psychological symptoms of somatic symptom disorder (cognitive, affective and behavioral) in women and men with somatic symptom disorder

Introduction: Somatic Symptom Disorder (SSD) is characterized by distressing somatic symptoms which are accompanied by disproportionate thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, has wide gender differences in prevalence, which has been less investigated in researches. Aim: The purpose of this study was to compare the physical (criteria A) and psychological symptom of SSD (criteria B) consist of cognitive, affective and behavioral in female and male patients. Method: This study was a descriptive and causal-comparative research. The participants included 60 Iranian women and 30 men with SSD in the age range of 18-60 years old who participated in the study based on the diagnosis of a psychiatrist by Convenience sampling method in 2021-2022. Data was collected by The Somatic Symptom Disorder-B (2017) Criteria Scale and The Somatic Symptom Scale8 (2014). For data analysis, MANOVA were applied by using SPSS-22. Results: The findings revealed that women with SSD generally showed more psychological symptoms compared to men and in the psychological subscales, affective (P=0.00) and behavioral (P=0.00) was more evident in them, however there was no significant difference between men and women in cognition of psychological subscales (P=0.18) and intensity of physical pain (P=0.13). Conclusion: According of the study, one of the factors of the difference in SSD prevalence can be from less expressing, not less suffering from the disorder in men. Studying the main causes of differences in the affective and behavior of psychological subscales such as cultural origin, can be effective in further studies.

Somatic symptom disorder in patients with post-COVID-19 neurological symptoms: a preliminary report from the somatic study (Somatic Symptom Disorder Triggered by COVID-19)

ObjectivesTo assess the diagnosis of somatic symptom disorder (SSD) in patients with unexplained neurological symptoms occurring after SARS-CoV-2 infection, also referred to as long COVID.DesignSingle-centre observational study.ParticipantsAdult patients experiencing unexplained...

Relations between criteria for somatic symptom disorder and quality of life in asylum seekers living in Germany

ObjectiveAsylum seekers often suffer from medically unexplained symptoms that affect their quality of life (QoL). The present study is the first to investigate the extent to which somatic symptoms and the B criteria for the DSM-5 somatic symptom disorder (SSD) are associated with the QoL of asylum seekers living in Germany. MethodsIn 144 asylum seekers, somatic symptoms (PHQ-15), B criteria for SSD, symptoms of posttraumatic stress (PDS), depressive symptoms (PHQ-9), post-migration living difficulties (PMLD), and QoL (EUROHIS) were assessed cross-sectionally. Multiple regressions in the total sample and in groups of somatic symptom severity (mild/moderate and severe) were conducted to examine the associations between somatic symptoms and B criteria with QoL. ResultsSleep problems and pain were the most frequently reported somatic symptoms. Sixteen (11%) participants met one B criterion, 24 (17%) met two, and 84 (58%) met all three criteria. QoL correlated negatively with somatic symptoms (r = −0.56, p < .001) and with the existence of at least one B criterion (r = −0.24, p < .001). In the total sample, stronger depressive and somatic symptoms were related to lower QoL (adjusted R2 = 0.53) while the B criteria were not. In persons with severe somatic symptom severity, the B criterion behavior was associated with lower QoL. ConclusionIn addition to stronger somatic and depressive symptoms, the psychological B criterion behavior seems to play an important role in the lower QoL of asylum seekers with severe somatic symptoms.

Concepts and Treatment Strategies for Somatic Symptom Disorder and Relative Disorders

Somatic Symptom Disorder is a specific disorder that is extensively defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth edition (DSM-5). Although the diagnostic criteria for somatic symptom disorder has archived breakaway from mind-body dualism and simplification for physicians, it remains vague and universally unapplicable. Moreover, despite the DSM-5 removing etiology in diagnosis, there is still a need to determine the etiology for individualized patient treatment. In particular, patients with somatic symptom disorder and relative disorders have psychological pathologies, such as somatization and anxiety about illness, all of which require psychiatric treatment. However, these patients initially visit physicians, not psychiatrists, since their symptoms are somatic, and they are anxious about the possibility of a physical disease. As such, supportive attitude and continuous treatment are important, as they can be performed even without a psychiatric consultation. Furthermore, while the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy is limited for these disorders, psychotherapy has the possibility to bring about a fundamental resolution. Particularly, cognitive behavior therapy or psychoanalytic psychotherapy has been found to be effective; however, they require high motivation and take up much time from the patients. Fortunately, the Morita therapy is especially effective for patients who pay excessive attention to somatic symptoms or are hypochondriacal, which is applicable for outpatients using a comparatively short interview that can even be performed in nonpsychiatric clinical settings.

The Validity of Somatic Symptom Disorder in Patients With Gastrointestinal Complaints.

The current diagnostic concept of somatic symptom disorder (SSD) aims to capture psychological burden due to bodily complaints independent of the medical cause. The aim of this study was to compare patients with chronic gastrointestinal (GI) complaints with SSD (SSD+) and without SSD (SSD-) along sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological characteristics. This cross-sectional study included 199 patients (n=92 SSD+ and n=107 SSD-) with distressing and chronic abdominal/lower GI complaints (≥6 mo) recruited from several primary, secondary, and tertiary medical care units. SSD+ patients were separated from SSD- patients by psychobehavioral positive criteria. Psychological distress (somatization, depression, anxiety, and illness anxiety) and risk factors (adverse childhood experiences, insecure attachment, mentalizing capacity, and levels of personality functioning) were measured. Nonparametric group comparisons were performed to analyze the differences of sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological characteristics between SSD+ and SSD- patients. About half of the SSD+ patients had a functional GI disorder and a third had an inflammatory bowel disease. SSD+ patients reported higher GI pain severity, higher health-related and work-related impairment, and higher psychological distress, especially illness anxiety, as well as higher mentalizing and personality functioning deficits. Overall, psychobehavioral positive criteria of SSD seem to be a valid identifier of patients exhibiting a high psychological burden, independent of the medical explanation of the GI complaints. There is a substantial overlap of SSD and general mental burden, but also evidence for a specific disease entity.

Excessiveness in Symptom-Related Thoughts, Feelings, and Behaviors: An Investigation of Somatic Symptom Disorders in the General Population.

The diagnostic criteria of somatic symptom disorder (SSD) emphasize that somatic symptoms receive disease value once they are accompanied by excessive thoughts, feelings, or behaviors. The main objective of this study was to examine what constitutes excessiveness in psychological reactions to somatic complaints and how excessive symptom-related behavior influences self-reported health status and health care utilization. A national, representative general population survey was performed between January and March 2016 in Germany, including 2395 individuals older than 13 years. Self-report questionnaires (Somatic Symptom Scale-8, Somatic Symptom Disorder-B Criteria Scale) were used to operationalize the SSD criteria. Group differences in the daily amount of time dedicated to physical complaints were analyzed between individuals with and without SSD. Stepwise linear regression analyses were performed to predict general mental and physical health status, and health care utilization. There was a significant effect of group (SSD yes/no) in daily time spent on symptoms, after controlling for age, sex, depression, and anxiety (F(1,2336) = 447.53, p < .001). The SSD group (n = 213) reported an average of 4 hours, whereas individuals without SSD reported 30 minutes. Results of the regression analyses showed that the combination of somatic symptoms and symptom-related psychological features is predictive of worsened self-reported physical and mental health status, and increased health care utilization. A range of 3 to 4 hours per day spent on dealing with physical complaints seems indicative of excessiveness. If, during a clinical consultation, a patient reports such a large amount of time, a more comprehensive clinical examination of SSD should follow.

The clinical effect of psychosomatic interventions on empty nose syndrome secondary to turbinate-sparing techniques: a prospective self-controlled study.

Individuals affected by empty nose syndrome secondary to turbinate-sparing techniques (ENS-type) experience decreased productivity and lifestyle disruption owing to considerable nasal-associated discomfort. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of psychosomatic intervention on ENS-type. A prospective self-controlled study was conducted, and 28 patients suffering from ENS-type who met the diagnostic criteria for somatic symptom disorder (SSD) according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition (DSM-5) received cognitive and behavioral therapy (CBT) plus antidepressants. Nasal symptom burden was evaluated using the 25-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-25). Somatic symptom burden, anxiety severity, and depression severity were assessed by the 25-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-15), the 9-item PHQ (PHQ-9), and the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) scale, respectively. Patient assessments were completed prior to treatment and 3 and 12 months after the intervention. The total scores of the SNOT-25 declined posttreatment, showing a significant difference at the 3-month and 12-month follow-ups compared with the baseline scores (p < 0.001). The severity of the 5 most common subjective symptoms, including "nose is too open," "waking up at night," "lack of a good night's sleep," "difficulty falling asleep," and "reduced concentration," declined significantly at 3 and 12 months posttreatment compared to baseline levels. Statistically significant changes in the PHQ-15, PHQ-9, and GAD-7 scores were observed at 3 and 12 months posttreatment compared to baseline scores (p < 0.001). This study showed that some patients with ENS-type meeting the diagnostic criteria for SSD might benefit from psychiatric treatment.

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Foreign Accent Syndrome: A Single-Case Experimental Design

Foreign accent syndrome (FAS) has historically been attributed to a neurological etiology. However, recent research has identified psychogenic causes of FAS, where patients present to health care services with medically unexplained FAS symptomology. Due to the rare nature of psychogenic FAS, there is currently no evidence-based psychological treatment for this syndrome. Although patients with psychogenic FAS do not meet the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; DSM-IV) or the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 diagnostic criteria for a diagnosis of somatization disorder, there are some similarities in presentation between psychogenic FAS and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5) criteria for somatic symptom disorder (SSD). These include the presence of distressing and disruptive symptoms that result in increased health care utilization. Given the emerging evidence for cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for SSDs, it is arguable that CBT could help patients with psychogenic FAS to manage the psychological distress they experience. This paper aims to explore the use of CBT in reducing the psychological distress of a patient with no organic explanation for FAS using a single-case (A-B) experimental design. The results suggest that CBT was effective in reducing distress, as measured using the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation–Outcome Measure (CORE-OM). This paper highlights the value in using an individualized formulation-driven CBT approach for presentations that do not yet have evidence-based guidelines. In this case, cognitive restructuring, activity scheduling, and stress management appear to be key mechanisms of change in reducing psychological distress associated with FAS.

Prevalence and overlap of somatic symptom disorder, bodily distress syndrome and fibromyalgia syndrome in the German general population: A cross sectional study

ObjectiveTo study the prevalence and clinical characteristics of Somatic Symptom Disorder (SSD), Bodily Distress Syndrome (BDS) and fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) and their overlap in the general German population. MethodsA cross-sectional nationally representative population survey was performed. 2531 participants (mean age 48.8 ± 17.85 years, 53.3% women) completed the Somatic Symptom Scale SSS-8, the Bodily Distress Syndrome (BDS) 25 checklist, the Whiteley Index 7 (WI-7), the self-administered comorbidity questionnaire and the Michigan Body Map. Case definitions of SSD, BDS and FMS were assigned using established criteria. Results4.5% of participants met the criteria of SSD (SSS – 8 at least one item “bothered very much” and WI- 7 total score ≥ 1). 9.6% met the criteria of single-organ BDS and 1.3% of multi-organ BDS. Prevalence of FMS according to 2016 criteria was 3.4%. 82.3% of FMS cases met any BDS criteria.28.1% of FMS cases satisfied SSD criteria. 28.8% of any BDS cases met the criteria of SSD. 75.1% of SSD cases met the criteria of any BDS. FMS cases reported the highest amount of somatic and psychological symptom burden and health anxieties. There were no differences in age and gender between any BDS and SSD cases. SSD cases reported worse general health and more fibromyalgia-related variables than any BDS cases. ConclusionsIn the general population, there is a substantial overlap between FMS and BDS, but not of FMS and SSD, and not of SSD and any BDS. Case definitions of the three disorders partially captured different groups in the general population.

Symptom Preoccupation in Fibromyalgia: Prevalence and Correlates of Somatic Symptom Disorder in a Self-Recruited Sample

Somatic symptom disorder (SSD) is characterized by a persistent and distressing psychological reaction to somatic symptoms. In pain disorders, the preoccupation with physical symptoms is associated withpoor long-term outcomes. SSD may therefore be of use to identify and help chronic pain patients with particular needs. To test the hypothesis that in fibromyalgia, SSD is associated with higher anxiety sensitivity, health anxiety, and reactivity to pain, in addition to lower nonreactivity to inner experiences. In addition, to investigate if individuals with SSD report a larger impact of fibromyalgia core symptoms, more somatic symptoms, and higher psychiatric comorbidity. Using data from a clinical trial involving self-referred individuals with fibromyalgia, we compared participants with SSD to participants without SSD using t-tests and logistic regression. Forty-nine out of 140 participants (35%) had SSD. Most findings corroborate that individuals with fibromyalgia who also meet criteria for SSD are worse off in terms of traits previously found to be predictive of a poor course in pain disorders. Post hoc analyses indicated that this could not be explained merely by a higher level of fibromyalgia core symptoms. SSD appears to be associated with a higher symptom burden in fibromyalgia, but further research is needed todraw firm conclusions regarding the reliability, acceptability, and utility of the SSD diagnosis in the clinic.

General practitioners' views on the diagnostic innovations in DSM-5 somatic symptom disorder - A focus group study

BackgroundThe innovations concerning the new diagnosis somatic symptom disorder (SSD) in the DSM-5 include the introduction of psychological diagnostic criteria and the elimination of the need to exclude all potential somatic causes of the symptoms. Thus far, it is unknown how general practitioners (GPs) evaluate the innovations conceptually and regarding their applicability in primary care. MethodWe performed six focus groups with GPs. A semi-structured interview-guideline included a presentation of the innovations of SSD and questions about the innovations and their potential (dis-)advantages from the GPs' points of view. The material was analyzed using structuring qualitative content analysis. ResultsA total of 41 GPs participated (mean (sd) age = 51 (8.5) years, female = 17, male = 24). The GPs assessed that the diagnostic innovations could help them to focus on symptom-related concerns and anxiety as core aspects of the patients' complaints. However, the meaning of the term excessive in the psychological diagnostic criteria (i.e., excessive worries, anxiety, time and energy) was ambiguous for the GPs. The GPs appreciated that a mental disorder can be assigned in addition to a severe physical disease. The GPs found it unlikely that diagnostic workup of somatic symptoms would be cut short if the diagnostic criteria of SSD were fulfilled in a given patient. ConclusionAltogether, for the GPs, the advantages of the new diagnostic criteria for SSD outweighed the disadvantages. In particular, the newly included psychological criteria were seen as an important advancement in comparison to the previous need of merely excluding a physical disease.

Psychiatric Evaluation during Epilepsy Monitoring Unit Admission Identifies Undiagnosed Psychiatric Co-Morbidities in Epilepsy Patients

Rationale: Epilepsy patients are known to have multiple comorbidities. Comorbid psychiatric diagnosis contributes to the poor outcome, especially undiagnosed psychiatric conditions. The goal of the study is to properly identify specific psychiatric diagnosis in this patient population, providing targeted treatment recommendation. Methods: All patients admitted to Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) from October 2016 to May 2017 are included in this analysis. Psychiatric evaluation was completed from all ninety-seven patients except one due to family refusal (N = 96). All patients have pre-existing epilepsy diagnosis or suspicion of epilepsy. Psychiatric evaluation includes patient interview, family interview, chart review, and discussion with neurology team. Results: Ninety-seven patients were admitted to the EMU between October 2016-November 2017; 96 of those patients received psychiatric intervention. There were 53 (55%) female participants and 43 (45%) male participants; mean age was 43 years old. Of ninety-six epilepsy and epilepsy suspect patients, 61 (64%) reported history of psychiatric illness; 34 (56%) of these patients were treated by their neurologist or primary care doctor for depression or anxiety. Four patients (4.2%) reported pre-existing Post-Trauma Stress Disorder (PTSD) with history of severe trauma. Four patients (4.2%) had autistic spectrum disorder diagnosed at young age; all related to early-onset epilepsy. Five patients (5.2%) had documented, pre-existing Psychogenic Non-Epileptic Seizure (PNES) or conversion disorder evidenced by negative EEG. A few other psychiatric diagnoses were unrelated to epilepsy. Thirty-five patients (36%) who reported no pre-existing psychiatric diagnosis had never had a psychiatric evaluation. After formal psychiatric screening at EMU, 56 out of 96 (58%) of patients’ psychiatric diagnosis has changed. Ten out of 41 (24%) of the patients with pre-existing diagnosis of depression or anxiety were found to have different types of somatic symptoms. With EEG correlation, 13 (14%) patients were confirmed to have PNES or conversion disorder with mixed symptoms during EMU admission from 5 (5%) diagnosed PNES cases before EMU admission. Nine patients met the criteria of somatic symptom disorder with chronic, non-neurological symptoms. Seven (7%) patients received a new diagnosis of adjustment disorder; four of them were due to uncontrolled epilepsy. Five patients received a new diagnosis of PTSD with severe early life trauma; among them, three patients also received another new diagnosis of chronic somatic symptom disorder. Conclusions: Proper diagnosis of psychiatric comorbidities is the first step in treatment. Inpatient psychiatric evaluation during EMU admission identifies more specific psychiatric diagnoses, leading to more targeted treatment recommendations. We strongly recommend integrated psychiatric evaluation for all EMU admissions. Psychiatric consultation with daily inpatient follow-up during EMU admission identified PNES, conversion disorder with mixed symptoms, other somatic symptom disorders and adjustment disorder related to epilepsy, which led to more targeted treatment recommendations. Unrecognized and untreated conversion patients are just as disabled as patients with epilepsy. The misdiagnosis of PNES leads to inappropriate treatment of presumed epilepsy, with significant risk of iatrogenic injury, morbidity and increased cost to patient and to the health care system.

Operationalization of diagnostic criteria of DSM-5 somatic symptom disorders

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to test the operationalization of DSM-5 somatic symptom disorder (SSD) psychological criteria among Chinese general hospital outpatients.MethodsThis multicenter, cross-sectional study enrolled 491 patients from 10 general hospital outpatient departments. The structured clinical “interview about cognitive, affective, and behavioral features associated with somatic complaints” was used to operationalize the SSD criteria B. For comparison, DSM-IV somatoform disorders were assessed with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview plus. Cohen’s к scores were given to illustrate the agreement of the diagnoses.ResultsA three-structure model of the interview, within which items were classified as respectively assessing the cognitive (B1), affective (B2), and behavioral (B3) features, was examined. According to percentages of screening-positive persons and the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis, a cut-off point of 2 was recommended for each subscale of the interview. With the operationalization, the frequency of DSM-5 SSD was estimated as 36.5% in our sample, and that of DSM-IV somatoform disorders was 8.2%. The agreement between them was small (Cohen’s к = 0.152). Comparisons of sociodemographic features of SSD patients with different severity levels (mild, moderate, severe) showed that mild SSD patients were better-off in terms of financial and employment status, and that the severity subtypes were congruent with the level of depression, anxiety, quality of life impairment, and the frequency of doctor visits.ConclusionsThe operationalization of the diagnosis and severity specifications of SSD was valid, but the diagnostic agreement between DSM-5 SSD and DSM-IV somatoform disorders was small. The interpretation the SSD criteria should be made cautiously, so that the diagnosis would not became over-inclusive.

DSM-5 illness anxiety disorder and somatic symptom disorder: Comorbidity, correlates, and overlap with DSM-IV hypochondriasis

ObjectiveTo investigate the reliability, validity and utility of DSM-5 illness anxiety disorder (IAD) and somatic symptom disorder (SSD), and explore their overlap with DSM-IV Hypochondriasis in a health anxious sample. MethodsTreatment-seeking patients with health anxiety (N=118) completed structured diagnostic interviews to assess DSM-IV Hypochondriasis, DSM-5 IAD, SSD, and comorbid mental disorders, and completed self-report measures of health anxiety, comorbid symptoms, cognitions and behaviours, and service utilization. ResultsIAD and SSD were more reliable diagnoses than Hypochondriasis (kappa estimates: IAD: 0.80, SSD: 0.92, Hypochondriasis: 0.60). 45% of patients were diagnosed with SSD, 47% with IAD, and 8% with comorbid IAD/SSD. Most patients with IAD fluctuated between seeking and avoiding care (61%), whereas care-seeking (25%) and care-avoidant subtypes were less common (14%). Half the sample met criteria for DSM-IV Hypochondriasis; of those, 56% met criteria for SSD criteria, 36% for IAD, and 8% for comorbid IAD/SSD. Compared to IAD, SSD was characterized by more severe health anxiety, somatic symptoms, depression, and higher health service use, and higher rates of major depressive disorder, panic disorder and agoraphobia. ConclusionsDSM-5 IAD and SSD classifications reliably detect more cases of clinically significant health anxiety than DSM-IV Hypochondriasis. The differences between IAD and SSD appear to be due to severity. Future research should explore the generalizability of these findings to other samples, and whether diagnostic status predicts treatment response and long-term outcome.

Somatic Symptom Disorder and Related Conditions

Somatic symptom disorder (SSD) is a novel construct, first presented in the DSM-5. It has two criteria: distressing or impairing bodily symptoms and excessive or disproportionate thoughts, feelings, or behaviors directed toward those symptoms. The criteria must be applied critically to make sense logically and clinically. The framework does not suggest any causal relationship between the elements. SSD uses a different formulation than in previous constructs, with no requirement that symptoms be medically unexplained. Little research has been conducted about SSD, and it is inappropriate to draw conclusions from similar diagnoses. Therefore, almost nothing is known about epidemiology, natural history, and treatment response in SSD. Health anxiety disorder is similar to SSD, but without significant somatic symptoms. Conversion disorder and factitious disorder entail more specific findings than does SSD. Providers should carefully apply diagnostic criteria for SSD, focus on the individual’s distress, and consider how this diagnosis influences the provider-patient relationship. Future research will refine the understanding of the condition and therapeutic approaches to it. This review contains 1 figure, 5 tables, and 39 references. Key words: behaviors, conversion disorder, disproportionate, excessive, factitious disorder, feelings, health anxiety, somatic symptom disorder, somatization, thoughts

DSM-5 somatic symptom disorder in patients with vertigo and dizziness symptoms

ObjectiveDSM-5 somatic symptom disorder (SSD) could potentially be a highly relevant diagnosis for patients with vertigo and dizziness. The criteria of SSD, particularly the B-criterion with its three components (cognitive, affective, behavioral), have however not yet been investigated in this patient group. MethodsWe evaluated a large sample (n=399) of outpatients presenting in a neurological setting. Physical examinations and a psychometric assessment (SCID-I) were conducted; patients completed self-report questionnaires. The diagnosis of SSD was assigned retrospectively. The prevalence of SSD, its diagnostic criteria, and its overlap with former DSM-IV somatoform disorders were evaluated; comparisons were drawn between (1) patients fulfilling different components of the B-criterion and (2) patients with diagnoses after DSM-IV vs. DSM-5. ResultsSSD was almost twice as common as DSM-IV somatoform disorders. Patients with all three components of the B-criterion reported the highest impairment levels. Patients with both DSM-IV somatoform disorders and DSM-5 SSD were more impaired compared to groups with one of the diagnoses; patients with DSM-IV somatoform disorders only were more impaired than those with SSD only. ConclusionsOur findings demonstrate that SSD is highly prevalent in patients with vertigo and dizziness. The classification of severity based on the number of psychological symptoms appears valid and may assist in finding suitable treatment options according to clinical practice guidelines. Future studies should investigate the overlap of SSD and other psychiatric disorders, this may assist in better defining the diagnostic criteria of SSD.

Clinical utility of the list sign as a predictor of non-demyelinating disorders in a multiple sclerosis (MS) practice.

Not all patients referred for evaluation of multiple sclerosis (MS) meet criteria required for MS or related entities. Identification of markers to exclude demyelinating disease may help detect patients whose presenting symptoms are inconsistent with MS. In this study, we evaluate whether patients who present a self-prepared list of symptoms during an initial visit are less likely to have demyelinating disease and whether this action, which we term the "list sign," may help exclude demyelinating disease. Using chart review, 300 consecutive new patients who presented for evaluation to a neurologist at a tertiary MS referral center were identified retrospectively. Patients were defined as having demyelinating disease if diagnosed with MS or a related demyelinating condition. Of the 233 enrolled subjects, 157 were diagnosed with demyelinating disease and 74 did not meet criteria for demyelinating disease. Fifteen (8.4%) subjects had a positive list sign, of which 1 patient had demyelinating disease. The 15 subjects described a mean of 12.07 symptoms, and 8 of these patients met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) criteria for somatic symptom disorder. The specificity and positive predictive value of the list sign for non-demyelinating disease were 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96-0.99) and 0.93 (95% CI 0.66-0.99), respectively. A positive list sign may be useful to exclude demyelinating disease and to guide diagnostic evaluations for other conditions. Patients with a positive list sign also have a high incidence of somatic symptom disorder.