‘You feel like your whole world is caving in’: A qualitative study of primary care patients’ conceptualisations of emotional distress

A. Geraghty, M. Santer, S. Williams, J. Mc Sharry, P. Little, R. Muñoz, T. Kendrick, M. Moore
{"title":"‘You feel like your whole world is caving in’: A qualitative study of primary care patients’ conceptualisations of emotional distress","authors":"A. Geraghty, M. Santer, S. Williams, J. Mc Sharry, P. Little, R. Muñoz, T. Kendrick, M. Moore","doi":"10.1177/1363459316674786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"General practitioners are tasked with determining the nature of patients’ emotional distress and providing appropriate care. For patients whose symptoms appear to fall near the ‘boundaries’ of psychiatric disorder, this can be difficult with important implications for treatment. There is a lack of qualitative research among patients with symptoms severe enough to warrant consultation, but where general practitioners have refrained from diagnosis. We aimed to explore how patients in this potentially large group conceptualise their symptoms and consequently investigate lay understandings of complex distinctions between emotional distress and psychiatric disorder. Interviews were conducted with 20 primary care patients whom general practitioners had identified as experiencing emotional distress, but had not diagnosed with major depressive disorder. Participants described severe emotional experiences with substantial impact on their lives. The term ‘depression’ was used in many different ways; however, despite severity, they often considered their emotional experience to be different to their perceived notions of ‘actual’ depression or mental illness. Where anxiety was mentioned, use appeared to refer to an underlying generalised state. Participants drew on complex, sometimes fluid and often theoretically coherent conceptualisations of their emotional distress, as related to, but distinct from, mental disorder. These conceptualisations differ from those frequently drawn on in research and treatment guidelines, compounding the difficulty for general practitioners. Developing models of psychological symptoms that draw on patient experience and integrate psychological/psychiatric theory may help patients understand the nature of their experience and, critically, provide the basis for a broader range of primary care interventions.","PeriodicalId":231462,"journal":{"name":"Health (London, England : 1997)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health (London, England : 1997)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1363459316674786","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

General practitioners are tasked with determining the nature of patients’ emotional distress and providing appropriate care. For patients whose symptoms appear to fall near the ‘boundaries’ of psychiatric disorder, this can be difficult with important implications for treatment. There is a lack of qualitative research among patients with symptoms severe enough to warrant consultation, but where general practitioners have refrained from diagnosis. We aimed to explore how patients in this potentially large group conceptualise their symptoms and consequently investigate lay understandings of complex distinctions between emotional distress and psychiatric disorder. Interviews were conducted with 20 primary care patients whom general practitioners had identified as experiencing emotional distress, but had not diagnosed with major depressive disorder. Participants described severe emotional experiences with substantial impact on their lives. The term ‘depression’ was used in many different ways; however, despite severity, they often considered their emotional experience to be different to their perceived notions of ‘actual’ depression or mental illness. Where anxiety was mentioned, use appeared to refer to an underlying generalised state. Participants drew on complex, sometimes fluid and often theoretically coherent conceptualisations of their emotional distress, as related to, but distinct from, mental disorder. These conceptualisations differ from those frequently drawn on in research and treatment guidelines, compounding the difficulty for general practitioners. Developing models of psychological symptoms that draw on patient experience and integrate psychological/psychiatric theory may help patients understand the nature of their experience and, critically, provide the basis for a broader range of primary care interventions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“你觉得你的整个世界都崩塌了”:一项关于初级保健患者对情绪困扰概念的定性研究
全科医生的任务是确定患者情绪困扰的性质并提供适当的护理。对于那些症状接近精神障碍“边界”的患者来说,这可能很困难,对治疗有重要意义。在症状严重到需要咨询但全科医生不愿诊断的患者中,缺乏定性研究。我们的目的是探索这个潜在的大群体中的患者如何概念化他们的症状,从而调查情绪困扰和精神障碍之间复杂区别的外行理解。对20名初级保健患者进行了访谈,这些患者被全科医生确定为经历情绪困扰,但未被诊断为重度抑郁症。参与者描述了对他们的生活产生重大影响的严重情感经历。“抑郁”这个词有很多不同的用法;然而,尽管病情严重,他们通常认为自己的情绪体验与他们认为的“实际”抑郁或精神疾病不同。当提到焦虑时,use似乎指的是一种潜在的普遍状态。参与者利用复杂的,有时是流动的,通常是理论上连贯的概念来描述他们的情绪困扰,这与精神障碍有关,但又不同。这些概念不同于研究和治疗指南中经常使用的概念,增加了全科医生的难度。开发基于患者经验并整合心理学/精神病学理论的心理症状模型,可能有助于患者了解其经验的本质,并且至关重要的是,为更广泛的初级保健干预提供基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Whose crisis? Pandemic flu, ‘communication disasters’ and the struggle for hegemony The fundamental role of storytelling and practical wisdom in facilitating the ethics education of junior doctors Family trouble: Heteronormativity, emotion work and queer youth mental health Social ecology of resilience and Sumud of Palestinians ‘You feel like your whole world is caving in’: A qualitative study of primary care patients’ conceptualisations of emotional distress
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1