SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010
Consultation letters for medically unexplained physical symptoms in primary care.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Behavioural modification interventions for medically unexplained symptoms in primary care: systematic reviews and economic evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Pooled it
- Psychosocial interventions for conversion and dissociative disorders in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Functional Somatic Symptoms.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Non-pharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders and medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Enhanced care by generalists for functional somatic symptoms and disorders in primary care.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Trial
- Article
- Working Conditions of Occupational Physicians-A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Article
- The quality of the sickness certificate. A case control study of patients with symptom and disease specific diagnoses in primary health care in Sweden.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2019Article
- Characteristics of undiagnosed diseases network applicants: implications for referring providers.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Effectiveness of a Blended Multidisciplinary Intervention for Patients with Moderate Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms (PARASOL): Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2018Article
- A European Research Agenda for Somatic Symptom Disorders, Bodily Distress Disorders, and Functional Disorders: Results of an Estimate-Talk-Estimate Delphi Expert Study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2018Article
- What do guidelines and systematic reviews tell us about the management of medically unexplained symptoms in primary care?BJGP open · 2017Article
- Article
- Inpatient hospital costs and length of stay for the treatment of affective and somatoform disorders - evidence from Germany.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2014Article
- Non-specific, functional, and somatoform bodily complaints.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2012Article
- Persistent frequent attenders in primary care: costs, reasons for attendance, organisation of care and potential for cognitive behavioural therapeutic intervention.BMC family practice · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn primary care between 10% and 35% of all visits concern patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS). MUPS are associated with high medical consumption, significant disabilities and psychiatric morbidity.
objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of consultation letters (CLs) to assist primary care physicians or occupational health physicians in the treatment of patients with MUPS and diagnostic subgroups. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group Controlled Trials Registers, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 2, 2009), MEDLINE (1966-2009), MEDLINE In Process (2009-08-17), EMBASE (1974-2009), PSYCINFO (1980-2009) and CINAHL (1982-2009). We screened the references lists of selected studies and consulted experts in the field to identify any additional, eligible RCTs. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs of CLs for patients with MUPS being treated in primary care settings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened the abstracts of the studies identified through the searches and independently assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We resolved any disagreement by discussion with a third review author. We assessed heterogeneity and, where a number of studies reported the same outcomes, pooled results in a meta-analysis. MAIN
resultsWe included six RCTs, with a total of 449 patients. In four studies (267 patients) the CL intervention resulted in reduced medical costs (in two studies the outcomes could be pooled: MD -352.55 US Dollars (95% CI -522.32 to -182.78)) and improved physical functioning (three studies, MD 5.71 (95% CI 4.11 to 7.31)). In two studies (182 patients) the intervention was a joint consultation with a psychiatrist in presence of the physician, and resulted in reduced severity of somatization symptoms, reduced medical consumption and improved social functioning. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere is limited evidence that a CL is effective in terms of medical costs and improvement of physical functioning for patients with MUPS in primary care. The results are even less pronounced in patients with clinically less severe, but more meaningful, forms of MUPS and the results vary for other patient-related outcomes. All studies, except one, were performed in the United States and therefore the results can not be generalized directly to countries with other healthcare systems. Furthermore all studies were small and of only moderate quality. There is very limited evidence that a joint consultation with the patient by a psychiatrist in the presence of the physician, together with the provision of a CL, reduces severity of somatization symptoms and medical consumption.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.