Abstract
Objective: We tested the theory that general practitioners (GPs) offer somatic intervention to patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) as a defensive response to patients' dependence. We predicted that GPs most likely to respond somatically after patients indicated symptomatic or psychosocial needs had attachment style characterised by negative models of self and others.
Method: Twenty-five GPs identified 308 patients presenting MUS and indicated their own models of self and others. Consultations were audio recorded and coded speech-turn-by-speech-turn. We modeled the probability of GPs proposing somatic intervention on any turn as a function of their models of self and other and the number of prior turns containing symptomatic or psychosocial presentations.
Results: Prior psychosocial presentations decreased the likelihood of GPs offering somatic intervention. The decrease was greatest in GPs with most positive models of self and, contrary to prediction, least positive models of others. The positive relationship between prior somatic presentations and the likelihood that GPs offered somatic intervention was unrelated to either model.
Conclusion: Findings are incompatible with our theory that GPs propose somatic interventions defensively. Instead, GPs may provide somatic intervention because they value patients (positive model of others) but devalue their own psychological skills (negative model of self). (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 104-11 |
Number of pages | 8 |
Journal | General Hospital Psychiatry |
Volume | 30 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Mar 2008 |
Keywords
- primary care
- medically unexplained symptoms
- communication
- attachment
- RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL
- PRIMARY-CARE
- GENERAL-PRACTITIONERS
- PHYSICAL SYMPTOMS
- PERSONAL AWARENESS
- FAMILY PHYSICIANS
- PATIENT
- SOMATIZATION
- CONSULTATIONS
- MODEL