Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T09:04:57.209Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Attitudes of British Psychiatrists to the Diagnosis of Somatisation Disorder

A Questionnaire Survey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Julian Stern ,
Michael Murphy  and
Christopher Bass
Julian Stern*
Affiliation:
Maudsley Hospital, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AZ
Michael Murphy
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological Medicine, King's College Hospital, Denmark Hill, London SE5, Queen Mary's University Hospital, London SW15 5PN
Christopher Bass
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX3 9DU
*
∗Correspondence
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A postal questionnaire was sent to 195 senior British psychiatrists who were asked about their attitudes towards the DSM-III-R diagnosis of somatisation disorder (SD) and the ICD-10 diagnosis of multiple somatisation disorder. Of the 148 respondents, 98 (66%) had experience of liaison psychiatry, and these psychiatrists used the diagnosis significantly more often than those without liaison sessions. More than half the respondents perceived SD as both a personality disorder and a mental state disorder, although 27% thought that patients with SD had an undiagnosed physical disease. The marked discrepancy between British and North American psychiatrists in diagnostic practices was perceived to be a consequence of both the difference in health care systems and the interest shown in the disorder by North American psychiatrists, rather than a reflection of genuine differences in prevalence.

Type
Research Article
Information
The British Journal of Psychiatry , Volume 162 , Issue 4 , April 1993 , pp. 463 - 466
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1993 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Psychiatric Association (1980) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd edn) (DSM–III). Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar
American Psychiatric Association (1987) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd edn, revised) (DSM–III-R). Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar
Bass, C. & Murphy, M.R. (1990) Somatization disorder: critique of the concept and suggestions for future research. In Somatization: Physical Symptoms and Psychological Illness (ed. Bass, C.), pp. 307–332. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific.Google Scholar
Bhatt, A., Tomenson, B. & Benjamin, S. (1989) Transcultural patterns of somatization in primary care: a preliminary report. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 33, 671–680.Google Scholar
Deighton, C. & Nicol, A. (1985) Abnormal illness behaviour in young women in a primary care setting: is Briquet's syndrome a useful category? Psychological Medicine, 15, 515–520.Google Scholar
Escobar, J. (1987) Cross–cultural aspects of the somatization trait. Hospital Community Psychiatry, 38, 174–180.Google Scholar
Guze, S.B. (1975) The validity and significance of the clinical diagnosis of hysteria (Briquet's syndrome). American Journal of Psychiatry, 132, 138–141.Google Scholar
Jennett, B. (1986) High Technology Medicine: Benefits and Burdens (2nd edn). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, M.R. (1990) Classification of the somatoform disorders. In Somatization: Physical Symptoms and Psychological Illness (ed. Bass, C.), pp. 10–39. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific.Google Scholar
Regier, D.A. & Robins, L.N. (1990) Psychiatric Disorders in America. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Robbins, J.M. & Kirmayer, L. (1991) Cognitive and social factors in somatization. In Current Concepts in Somatization, Research and Clinical Perspectives (eds Kirmayer, L. & Robins, J. M.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.Google Scholar
Slater, E. (1965) Diagnosis of “hysteria”. British Medical Journal, i, 1395–1399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, J.M., Murphy, M.R. & Bass, C. (1992) Personality disorder and traits in patients with somatization disorder: a controlled study. (Submitted for publication.) Google Scholar
Schwartz, M., Hughes, D., Blazer, D., et al (1987) Somatization disorder in the community: a study of diagnostic concordance among three diagnostic systems. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 175, 26–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarnopolsky, A. & Berelowitz, M. (1984) “Borderline personality”. Diagnostic attitudes at the Maudsley Hospital. British Journal of Psychiatry, 144, 364–369.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vaillant, G. (1984) The disadvantages of DSM–III outweigh its advantages. American Journal of Psychiatry, 141, 542–545.Google Scholar
World Health Organization (1992) The ICD–10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders. Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.