Explore the vast range of titles available.

Women are reported to consult general practitioners (GPs) more frequently than men. However, previous studies on sex differences in help-seeking behavior for somatic symptoms do not distinguish between sex and gender, do not account for sex differences in presented symptoms, and are frequently conducted in clinical settings, automatically excluding non-help seekers. Therefore, we aim to assess the independent associations of sex and gender with primary care help-seeking for somatic symptoms in the general population. Records from the longitudinal population-based Lifelines Cohort Study were linked to routine electronic health records from GPs. Participants reporting new-onset common somatic symptoms. Associations between sex and gender, operationalized via a novel gender-index, with primary care help-seeking for somatic symptoms and differences in the strength of the association between gender and help-seeking for somatic symptoms between women and men. Of 20,187 individuals with linked data, 8325 participants (67.5% female; mean age = 44.5 years [SD = 12.9]) reported at least one new-onset somatic symptom. Hereof, 255 (3.1%) consulted the GP within 6 weeks of symptom onset. Female sex was positively associated with consulting the GP (OR = 1.78; 95%CI = 1.13-2.80), whereas feminine gender was not (OR = 0.67; 95%CI = 0.39-1.16). The latter association did not differ in strength between men and women. More paid working days are negatively associated with help-seeking (OR = 0.95; 95%CI = 0.91-0.98). The results suggest that female sex rather than feminine gender is associated with primary care help-seeking behavior for somatic symptoms. Nevertheless, clinicians should be aware that gender-related variables, such as mean paid working days, may be associated with help-seeking behavior.

Patients often report various symptoms after recovery from acute COVID-19. Previous studies on post-COVID-19 condition have not corrected for the prevalence and severity of these common symptoms before COVID-19 and in populations without SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to analyse the nature, prevalence, and severity of long-term symptoms related to COVID-19, while correcting for symptoms present before SARS-CoV-2 infection and controlling for the symptom dynamics in the population without infection. This study is based on data collected within Lifelines, a multidisciplinary, prospective, population-based, observational cohort study examining the health and health-related behaviours of people living in the north of the Netherlands. All Lifelines participants aged 18 years or older received invitations to digital COVID-19 questionnaires. Longitudinal dynamics of 23 somatic symptoms surrounding COVID-19 diagnoses (due to SARS-CoV-2 alpha [B.1.1.7] variant or previous variants) were assessed using 24 repeated measurements between March 31, 2020, and Aug 2, 2021. Participants with COVID-19 (a positive SARS-CoV-2 test or a physician's diagnosis of COVID-19) were matched by age, sex, and time to COVID-19-negative controls. We recorded symptom severity before and after COVID-19 in participants with COVID-19 and compared that with matched controls. 76 422 participants (mean age 53·7 years [SD 12·9], 46 329 [60·8%] were female) completed a total of 883 973 questionnaires. Of these, 4231 (5·5%) participants had COVID-19 and were matched to 8462 controls. Persistent symptoms in COVID-19-positive participants at 90–150 days after COVID-19 compared with before COVID-19 and compared with matched controls included chest pain, difficulties with breathing, pain when breathing, painful muscles, ageusia or anosmia, tingling extremities, lump in throat, feeling hot and cold alternately, heavy arms or legs, and general tiredness. In 12·7% of patients, these symptoms could be attributed to COVID-19, as 381 (21·4%) of 1782 COVID-19-positive participants versus 361 (8·7%) of 4130 COVID-19-negative controls had at least one of these core symptoms substantially increased to at least moderate severity at 90–150 days after COVID-19 diagnosis or matched timepoint. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report the nature and prevalence of post-COVID-19 condition, while correcting for individual symptoms present before COVID-19 and the symptom dynamics in the population without SARS-CoV-2 infection during the pandemic. Further research that distinguishes potential mechanisms driving post-COVID-19-related symptomatology is required. ZonMw; Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport; Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs; University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen; Provinces of Drenthe, Friesland, and Groningen.

In primary and secondary care medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) or functional somatic syndromes (FSS) constitute a major burden for patients and society with high healthcare costs and societal costs. Objectives were to provide an overview of the evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of interventions for MUS or FSS, and to assess the quality of these studies. We searched the databases PubMed, PsycINFO, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED) and the CEA registry to conduct a systematic review. Articles with full economic evaluations on interventions focusing on adult patients with undifferentiated MUS or fibromyalgia (FM), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), with no restrictions on comparators, published until 15 June 2018, were included. We excluded preventive interventions. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and cost-effectiveness data and used the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria Checklist to appraise the methodological quality. A total of 39 studies out of 1,613 articles met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two studies reported costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost-utility analyses (CUAs). In 13 CUAs the intervention conditions dominated the control conditions or had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the willingness-to-pay threshold of € 50,000 per QALY, meaning that the interventions were (on average) cost-effective in comparison with the control condition. Group interventions focusing on MUS (n = 3) or FM (n = 4) might be more cost-effective than individual interventions. The included studies were heterogeneous with regard to the included patients, interventions, study design, and outcomes. This review provides an overview of 39 included studies of interventions for patients with MUS and FSS and the methodological quality of these studies. Considering the limited comparability due to the heterogeneity of the studies, group interventions might be more cost-effective than individual interventions. Study methods were documented in an international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) protocol, registration number: CRD42017060424.

BackgroundPersistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders are conditions requiring a biopsychosocial approach to care, often from multiple professionals. The fragmentation of care common in most health systems results in unsatisfactory and challenging care experiences. Collaborative care networks form an important route towards improving outcomes and the overall experience of care for patients and professionals. While we have a good idea of what such collaborative care networks can look like, we lack knowledge on the practicalities of implementing change in such networks.ObjectivesThe core objective of this study is to implement change in a collaborative care network for persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders care. Our questions were twofold: first, what are examples of realistic action processes to improve such collaborative care networks? Second, what are, in our experience, conditions for an effective change process in such a collaborative care network?DesignParticipatory action research approach embedded within an active regional network between May 2023 and May 2024. The process was led by an action group who selected objectives and related actions with the aim of improving the network, leading to better care for people with persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders as well as improving satisfaction among professionals.SettingALK Netwerk Salland, a regional network of professionals and experts-by-experience, focused on care of persistent somatic symptoms. This network is based in the Salland region in the east of the Netherlands, centred around the city of Deventer.ParticipantsThe action group was made up of local stakeholders including experts-by-experience and health and social care professionals, facilitated by a researcher-in-residence. Other participants included members of the regional network who provided input towards the different objectives.ResultsOver the course of a year, three objectives were selected and enacted, including assessing the resources of the network, improving knowledge of treatment options and improving the shared vision of care. The process faced some challenges, such as changes in action group members and a lack of resources and time to enact changes. However, by having a trusted and engaged team, working with an active network, we were able to enact significant changes to the network, which may be sustained and built on through the ongoing action group.ConclusionsFuture participatory action research studies would benefit from a trusted and embedded researcher-in-residence, meaningful involvement early in the process of experts-by-experience, and serious consideration of realistic outcome measures to monitor for evaluation of changes made.

Persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders (PSS/FD) are complex conditions requiring collaboration between healthcare professionals. This is especially true at the interface between primary and secondary care interface. The current fragmentation of care is a major barrier to this, leading to poor experiences and outcomes and high costs for healthcare and society. The aim is to identify barriers and possible solutions for collaboration between primary and secondary care in patients with PSS/FD. In two sessions, using the nominal group technique, a mix of primary and secondary care professionals identified barriers and possible solutions to collaboration between primary and secondary care in PSS/FD care. Barriers to collaboration were identified during session one, with potential solutions identified during session two in response to the top eight barriers. Each session ended with a voting round ranking the barriers and solutions. A total of 102 healthcare professionals participated in two sessions. In the first session, 55 participants provided a list of 22 barriers, while in the second session, 47 participants provided 18 possible solutions. The top barriers related to shared language and protocols, referral quality, expectations and responsibilities between healthcare professionals and patients, and time pressure. The top solutions identified related to general practitioners using electronic consultations with specialists and shared terminology with patients. The identified barriers and possible solutions for collaboration between primary and secondary care need attention when considering collaboration in PSS/FD care and related settings, both in new and ongoing collaborations.

Background The effects of many treatments in healthcare are determined by factors other than the treatment itself. Patients’ expectations and the relationship with their healthcare provider can significantly affect treatment outcomes and thereby play a major role in eliciting placebo and nocebo effects. We aim to develop and evaluate an innovative communication training, consisting of an e-learning and virtual reality (VR) training, for healthcare providers across all disciplines, to optimize placebo and minimize nocebo effects through healthcare provider-patient communication. The current paper describes the development, mid-term evaluation, optimization, and final evaluation of the communication training, conducted in The Netherlands. Methods The development of both the e-learning and the VR training consisted of four phases: 1) content and technical development, 2) mid-term evaluation by healthcare providers and placebo/communication researchers, 3) optimization of the training, and 4) final evaluation by healthcare providers. To ensure the success, applicability, authenticity, and user-friendliness of the communication training, there was ongoing structural collaboration with healthcare providers as future end users, experts in the field of placebo/communication research, and educational experts in all phases. Results Placebo/communication researchers and healthcare providers evaluated the e-learning positively (overall 7.9 on 0–10 scale) and the content was perceived as useful, accessible, and interesting. The VR training was assessed with an overall 6.9 (0–10 scale) and was evaluated as user-friendly and a safe method for practicing communication skills. Although there were some concerns regarding the authenticity of the VR training (i.e. to what extent the virtual patient reacts like a real patient), placebo and communication researchers, as well as healthcare providers, recognized the significant potential of the VR training for the future. Conclusions We have developed an innovative and user-friendly communication training, consisting of an e-learning and VR training (2D and 3D), that can be used to teach healthcare providers how to optimize placebo effects and minimize nocebo effects through healthcare provider-patient communication. Future studies can work on improved authenticity, translate the training into other languages and cultures, expand with additional VR cases, and measure the expected effects on providers communication skills and subsequently patient outcomes.

Background/Objectives: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are rare mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, predominantly driven by KIT or PDGFRα oncogene mutations. Nonspecific symptoms contribute to diagnostic delays, with general practitioners (GPs) playing a pivotal role in early detection. However, studies on GIST-specific primary care pathways are limited. This study examines GP contacts, diagnoses, and prescribed drugs in primary care during the 12 months preceding GIST diagnosis. Methods: This case-control study utilized data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Nivel Primary Care Database. It included 294 GIST patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2020 and 576 matched cancer-free controls. GP contacts, diagnoses, and newly prescribed drugs were analyzed across two time intervals: 0–4 and 5–12 months prediagnosis. Statistical comparisons were conducted using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and descriptive analyses. Results: GIST cases had a median of six GP contacts (IQR 4–11) in the 12 months prediagnosis versus three (IQR 2–6) for controls (p < 0.05). Contacts increased 4 months before diagnosis, peaking 1 month prior. Common diagnoses in the 4-month interval included malignant neoplasms of the stomach (27.9%) and other digestive sites (27.6% and 11.2%), abdominal pain (9.5%), and iron deficiency anemia (9.5%). Newly prescribed drugs included proton pump inhibitors (13.9%) and osmotically acting laxatives (15.0%). Conclusions: This study highlights increased GP visits and specific reasons for these visits before GIST diagnosis. Future research should further examine GP records, not only through coded data but also unstructured data, and incorporate patient and GP perspectives to explore potential improvements in the diagnostic process.

ObjectivesTo explore the perceived working mechanisms of psychosomatic therapy according to patients with persistent somatic symptoms (PSS) and their psychosomatic therapists.DesignQualitative study using semistructured face-to-face interviews and focus groups. All interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed, by two researchers independently, based on the thematic analysis.SettingAlongside a randomised controlled trial to establish the (cost-)effectiveness of psychosomatic therapy in patients with PSS in primary care, we conducted a process evaluation with a qualitative study. Patients were recruited in general practice in three regions in the Netherlands.ParticipantsInterviews were conducted with twenty patients with PSS who received psychosomatic therapy and 25 psychosomatic therapists. In addition, two focus groups were conducted with six and seven psychosomatic therapists, respectively.InterventionPsychosomatic therapy, delivered by specialised exercise and physical therapists, is a multimodal and tailored treatment based on the biopsychosocial model.Outcome measuresExperiences, opinions and views from patients’ and therapists’ perspective on psychosomatic therapy were identified.ResultsA total of 37 interviews with patients, 25 interviews and two focus groups with therapists were analysed. Three main themes emerged from the data of the patients: (1) continuous alternation of psychosocial conversations and body-oriented exercises; (2) awareness of body–mind connection and (3) good relationship with therapist. Four main themes emerged from the data of the therapists (1) building rapport; (2) continuously searching for common ground; (3) making patients aware of the interaction between body and mind; and (4) continuous alternation between exploration and treatment.ConclusionAccording to patients as well as therapists, the continuous alternation of psychosocial conversations and body-oriented exercises to provide awareness of the interaction between body and mind are the perceived working mechanism of psychosomatic therapy. Therapeutic alliance and finding common ground between patient and therapist are prerequisites for the success of psychosomatic therapy.Trial registration numberNL7157 (NTR7356).

Background The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown measures had serious implications for community-dwelling older people with dementia. While the short-term impacts of the pandemic on this population have been well studied, there is limited research on its long-term impacts. Quantifying the long-term impacts may provide insights into whether healthcare adaptations are needed after the acute phase of the pandemic to balance infection prevention measures with healthcare provision. This study aims to examine patterns of psychotropic drug prescriptions and general practice consultations in community-dwelling older people with dementia during the first two years of the pandemic. Methods We utilised routine electronic health records from three Dutch academic general practice research networks located in the North, East, and South, between 2019 and 2021. We (1) compared the weekly prescription rates of five groups of psychotropic drugs and two groups of tracer drugs, and weekly general practice consultation rates per 1000 participants, between the first two years of the pandemic and the pre-pandemic phase, (2) calculated changes in these rates during three lockdowns and two relaxation phases relative to the corresponding weeks in 2019, and (3) employed interrupted time series analyses for the prescription rates. Analyses were performed for each region separately. Results The study population sizes in the North, East, and South between 2019 and 2021 were 1726 to 1916, 93 to 117, and 904 to 960, respectively. Data from the East was excluded from the statistical analyses due to the limited sample size. During the first two years of the pandemic, the prescription rates of psychotropic drugs were either lower or similar to those in the pre-pandemic phase, with differences varying from -2.6‰ to -10.2‰. In contrast, consultation rates during the pandemic were higher than in the pre-pandemic phase, increasing by around 38‰. Conclusions This study demonstrates a decrease in psychotropic drug prescriptions, but an increase in general practice consultations among community-dwelling older people with dementia during the first two years of the pandemic. However, reasons for the decrease in psychotropic drug prescriptions are unclear due to limited information on the presence of neuropsychiatric symptoms and the appropriateness of prescribing.

IntroductionPersistent somatic symptoms (PSS) are common both in the general population and primary care. They are bothersome in terms of psychological and somatic symptom burden. Health professionals often struggle with communication, as there is a lack of scientifically supported explanatory models for PSS or a focus merely on somatic aspects of the complaints, which both frustrate patients’ needs. The objective of the present study is therefore to develop a psychoeducational intervention based on a current evidence-based explanatory model, to examine its feasibility and form the basis for a large-scale randomised controlled trial.Methods and analysisIn a randomised controlled mixed-methods pilot trial, 75 adult psychosomatic outpatients with PSS (duration of symptoms ≥6 months) and accompanying psychological (Somatic Symptom B-Criteria Scale total score ≥18) and somatic symptom burden (Patient Health Questionnaire-15 score >10) and no prior psychosomatic treatment will be eligible. Participants will be presented with either the explanatory model without (intervention group 1, n=25) or with elements of personalisation (intervention group 2, n=25). Participants in the control group (n=25) will receive information on current PSS guidelines. Participants will be blinded to group assignment and interventions will be shown on tablet computers at the outpatient clinic. After 1 month, qualitative follow-up telephone interviews will be conducted. As primary outcomes, mean changes in psychological and somatic symptom burden will quantitatively be compared between groups, respectively. Behavioural change mechanisms and feasibility of the three interventions will be evaluated using quantitative and qualitative measures.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval has been granted by the medical ethics board of the Hamburg Medical Chamber (PV5653). Results from this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences.Trial registration numberDRKS00018803.