Advances in Psychosomatic Medicine最新文献

Since the publication of DSM-IV in 1994, neurobiologists and anthropologists have criticized the rigidity of its diagnostic criteria that appear to exclude whole classes of alternate illness presentations, as well as the lack of attention in contemporary psychiatric nosology to the role of contextual factors in the emergence and characteristics of psychopathology. Experts in culture and mental health have responded to these criticisms by revising the very process of diagnosis for DSM-5. Specifically, the DSM-5 Cultural Issues Subgroup has recommended that concepts of culture be included more prominently in several areas: an introductory chapter on Cultural Aspects of Psychiatric Diagnosis - composed of a conceptual introduction, a revised Outline for Cultural Formulation, a Cultural Formulation Interview that operationalizes this Outline, and a glossary on cultural concepts of distress - as well as material directly related to culture that is incorporated into the description of each disorder. This chapter surveys these recommendations to demonstrate how culture and context interact with psychiatric diagnosis at multiple levels. A greater appreciation of the interplay between culture, context, and biology can help clinicians improve diagnostic and treatment planning.

For the last five centuries, France's international influence has been constant. This has been particularly evident in the areas of general culture, history and science. In psychiatry, the role of Pinel during the French Revolution, and the discovery of the first psychotropic agent, chlorpromazine, by Delay and Deniker are two outstanding historical facts. This chapter examines the contributions of French social scientists in the understanding of the sequelae of colonial exploitation, racism and political oppression. The establishment of a multi-ethnic society in France and Francophile regions of the world has led to the gradual creation of a cultural psychiatry rich in terminological influences, clinical understanding, training programs and research. Closer connections between French psychiatric thought and Anglophile psychiatry is likely to produce beneficial effects.

In most societies, members of a culture have attempted to help each other in times of trouble with various types of healing methods. Demoralization - an individual experience related to a group phenomenon - responds to certain elements shared by all psychotherapies. This article has three objectives: (1) to review the theoretical background leading to our current views on culture and demoralization in psychotherapy, (2) to discuss the methodological challenges faced in the cross-cultural study of demoralization and psychotherapy, and (3) to describe the clinical applications and research prospects of this area of inquiry. Demoralization follows a shattering of the individual's assumptive world and it is different from homeostatic responses to a stressful situation or from depressive disorders. Only a few comparative studies of this construct across cultures have been undertaken. The presentation of distress may vary widely from culture to culture and even within the same culture. To avoid 'category fallacy', it is important to understand the idioms of distress peculiar to a cultural group. A cultural psychiatrist or psychotherapist would have to identify patient's values and sentiments, reconstruct his/her personal and collective ambient worlds, and only then study demoralization. The limitations of our current diagnostic systems have resulted in methodological challenges. Cultural clinicians should consider using a combination of both 'clinimetric' and 'perspectivistic' approaches in order to arrive at a diagnosis and identify the appropriate intervention. The presenting problem has to be understood in the context of the patient's individual, social and cultural background, and patients unfamiliar with Western-type psychotherapies have to be prepared to guide their own expectations before the former are used. Future research should identify the gaps in knowledge on the effectiveness of cultural psychotherapy at reversing or preventing demoralization.

Despite the fact that there is an extensive scientific literature regarding the importance of exposure to psychosocial stressors, the assessment of such stressors is often neglected in clinical work. The present review summarizes the scientific literature on critical life changes and work-related stressors. Particular emphasis has been on somatic outcomes and physiological processes that have been shown to be affected by exposure to stressors. Although the relationships are highly complex, it could be concluded that exposure to stressors may often determine the onset of many illnesses. Standardized well-functioning assessment instruments that could be used in clinical practice exist and should be used.

Acute and chronic illness exists in a social context. A biopsychosocial assessment should include an evaluation of the patient's social situation, the nature of the patient's interpersonal connections, and his/her family's functioning. Families can influence health by direct biological pathways, health behavior pathways, and psychophysiological pathways. There are a large number of family-based risks factors as well as many protective relational factors that influence the onset and course of illness. A family assessment is the first step in determining both the need for further intervention and the specific areas of family life that might need to be addressed. A family assessment provides information about the social substrate for the evolution of the presenting complaint as well as information to better understand the patient's problems. There are many ways to assess families, and there are a variety of family assessment instruments to help with the assessments. Clinician will be best served by becoming familiar and comfortable with at least one assessment model that is consistent, structured, and evaluates a wide range of family functions. Such an assessment can be incorporated into routine clinical care. A good family assessment can be therapeutic in and of itself even if the decision is made that no further family intervention is indicated.

The notion that personality variables can affect vulnerability to specific diseases has been widely promoted in psychosomatic medicine. Over the time, some personality patterns have been extensively studied. Among them, alexithymia, type A, and type D personality are the most relevant. However, also temperament and character has increasingly been object of studies. Alexithymia is currently recognized as a risk factor for medical, psychiatric, or behavioral problems; type A personality is recognized to increase the risk for coronary artery disease, and type D personality has been related to adverse cardiac events and cardiovascular outcomes. The growing interest and clinical role of the personality constructs in psychosomatic medicine has been favored by the revolutionary understanding that personality factors are not causes of medical disease but their moderators/mediators, and by the decline of the psychometric distinction between state and trait. Indeed, it is nowadays recognized that psychological constructs traditionally conceived as trait dimensions may surprisingly display sensitivity to change in specific clinical situations. Assessing personality, thus, has become worth pursuing since it may give unique information about individuals with medical conditions and contribute to completely understand medical patients and their global health as well as formulating optimal decision-making and treatment planning. In this framework, the present chapter has the aim to provide insight into personality dimensions in psychosomatic medicine and describe the main instruments to assess it.

The main ethical perspective in the clinical relationship takes into consideration the vulnerability of the clinical condition before threats and risks that can undermine the integrity and dignity of the person. Psychosomatic medicine faces complex cases whose ethical problems cannot only be solved by applying top-down deontological or utilitarian approaches, principlism, which is limited mainly to easing ethical tensions, or a bottom-up approach, the casuistic model, case-based reasoning. In introducing vulnerability as the core of ethical questioning as a principle ontological priority over other principles, relational ethics refers to the appreciation of the responsibility of health professionals through which a health care professional and the patient 'together' can construct more reasonable and prudential courses of action with, for, and by the patient. The model of relational ethics is based on three main aspects, clinically integrated approach, science/philosophy partnership, and deliberative process, that when taken together, form an intermediate model that ensures prudent and reasonable decision-making. The three structural elements and characteristics of relational ethics create and maintain a responsible relationship between the professional and the patient being aware that the mutual vulnerability of health professional and the patient has a moral value and recognizing that their relationship will allow for personal development of each. I conceptualized the model of relational ethics as one that embraces the meta-ethical principles of vulnerability, dignity, responsibility, and respect for autonomy as they are considered by many international declarations or conventions. This model integrates three key polarities: ensure conditions of authenticity, facilitate a process of cooperative mutuality, and promote opportunities for growth and development. Relational ethics can be used to solve major ethical problems in psychosomatic medicine, capacity , informed consent, and confidentiality.

Habits relevant to health include physical activities, diet, smoking, drinking and drug consumption. Despite the fact that benefits of modifying lifestyle are increasingly demonstrated in clinical and general populations, assessment of lifestyle and therapeutic lifestyle changes is neglected in practice. In this review, associations between unhealthy lifestyle and health outcomes are presented. Particular emphasis will be placed on description and discussion of the standardized assessment instruments and behavioral methods that could be used in clinical practice to measure lifestyles.

Good sexual functioning is a part of overall well-being. Assessment of sexual functioning should be part of any complete psychosomatic assessment. The cornerstone of this assessment is a comprehensive clinical interview of the patient, with, if possible, collateral information obtained from the partner or another clinician. In addition, comprehensive assessment of sexual function should include a physical examination with a special focus on sexual function, laboratory testing and possibly other specialized testing and, in some cases, psychometric assessment. The results of a thorough assessment may serve as a basis for considering possible etiology(ies) of sexual dysfunction, coexisting comorbidities and as a starting point of managing sexual dysfunction.

The Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research (DCPR) are a diagnostic and conceptual framework that aims to translate psychosocial variables that derived from psychosomatic research into operational tools whereby individual patients could be identified. A set of 12 syndromes was developed and grouped in the clusters of abnormal illness behavior (health anxiety, disease phobia, thanatophobia, and illness denial), somatization (functional somatic symptoms secondary to a psychiatric disorder, persistent somatization, conversion symptoms, and anniversary reaction), irritability (type A behavior, irritable mood), demoralization, and alexithymia. This chapter aims to illustrate the criteria for each of the 12 DCPR syndromes and how to diagnose them with the aid of the DCPR Structured Interview, as illustrated in a clinical example.