Background Heart rate variability (HRV) has been proposed as a marker of autonomic dysfunction in somatic symptom disorder (SSD), but findings based on single parameters remain inconsistent. Pattern-based approaches may provide a more integrative characterization of autonomic regulation. Methods This study applied a four-pattern HRV classification (normal, low, relatively high sympathetic, relatively high vagal) in 148 patients with SSD from the SOMA.SSD cohort. Resting-state HRV was assessed using 5-min ECG recordings at baseline. Psychopathology (PHQ-15, PHQ-9, SSD-12) was assessed at baseline, 6, and 12 months. Group differences and longitudinal effects were analyzed using ANOVA and linear mixed-effects models. Results Overall, no significant differences in symptom levels were observed across the four HRV patterns groups at baseline. However, post-hoc comparisons indicated that patients with a low HRV pattern reported higher somatic symptom severity, depressive symptoms, and SSD-related distress compared to the normal HRV group. These differences remained stable over 12 months, with no significant time or interaction effects. Relatively high sympathetic and relatively high vagal patterns were not associated with increased psychopathology. Conclusions A pattern-based HRV classification is applicable in patients with SSD and highlights the clinical relevance of a low HRV pattern. This approach may support physiologically informed subtyping in psychosomatic research and could have implications for future clinical stratification.

ObjectiveCurrent diagnostic concepts of somatic symptom disorder (SSD) in DSM-5 and bodily distress disorder (BDD) in ICD-11 require certain psychological criteria, but researchers have called for further specification. Therefore, in a first step, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the current evidence on psychological factors associated with SSD/BDD and/or disorder-relevant clinical outcomes such as symptom severity and impairment.MethodsPsychological factors were systematically searched using Pubmed, Cochrane Library and Psycinfo via EBSCO. Studies providing original data in English or German, after 2009 were included. Cross-sectional, cohort and case-control studies investigating at least one psychological factor in individuals with SSD/BDD in the context of disorder-relevant outcomes were included.ResultsForty-three eligible studies (n = 3760 patients) in SSD (none in BDD) provided data on at least one psychological factor, 37 in case-control format, 10 cross-sectional and 5 longitudinal. Meta-analyses of the case-control studies found patients with SSD to be more impaired by depression (SMD = 1.80), anxiety (SMD = 1.55), health anxiety (SMD = 1.31) and alexithymia (SMD = 1.39), compared to healthy controls. Longitudinal results are scarce, mixed, and require refining, individual studies suggest self-concept of bodily weakness, anxiety and depression to be predictive for persistent SSD and physical functioning.ConclusionThis review provides a detailed overview of the current evidence of psychological factors in relation to SSD/BDD. Future studies on SSD and BDD should include under-studied psychological factors, such as negative affect, fear avoidance, or emotion regulation. More longitudinal studies are needed to assess the predictive value of these factors.

COPYRIGHT © 2023 Berens, Ehrenthal and Tesarz. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. Commentary: The framework for systematic reviews on psychological risk factors for persistent somatic symptoms and related syndromes and disorders (PSY-PSS)

BACKGROUND:The increasing admissions of very elderly patients to intensive care units (ICUs) over recent decades highlight a growing need for understanding acute kidney injury (AKI) in this population. Although these individuals are potentially at high risk for AKI and adverse outcomes, data on AKI in this population is scarce. This study investigates the AKI incidence and outcomes of critically-ill patients aging at least 90 years. METHODS:This retrospective cohort study conducted at the Department of Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany (2008-2020), investigates AKI incidence and outcomes between 2008 and 2020 in critically-ill patients aged ≥ 90 years. AKI was defined according to Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria using creatinine dynamics and/or urine output. Primary endpoint was overall mortality after 1 year. Secondary endpoints were in-hospital mortality, length of ICU and hospital stay. RESULTS:During the study period 92,958 critically-ill patients were treated and 1108 were ≥ 90 years. Of these, 1054 patients had available creatinine values and were included in the present study. AKI occurred in 24.4%, mostly classified as mild (17.5%). AKI was independently associated with a significant increase in overall mortality (HR 1.21, 95 %-CI: 1.01-1.46), in-hospital mortality (OR 2, 1.41-2.85), length of ICU (+2.8 days, 2.3-3.3) and hospital stay (+2.3 days, 0.9-3.7). Severity escalated these effects, but even mild AKI showed significance. Introducing urine-based criteria increased incidence but compromised mortality prediction. CONCLUSIONS:AKI is a frequent complication in very elderly critically-ill patients. Occurrence of AKI at any stage was associated with increased mortality. Predictive ability applied to AKI defined by creatinine but not urine output. Careful attention of creatinine dynamics is essential in very elderly ICU-patients.

Objective: The aim of this qualitative study was to provide an in-depth analysis of participants' experiences with video-animated explanatory models developed within the three-arm randomized controlled HERMES study ('Helpful explanatory models for somatic symptoms') and suggestions for further intervention improvement. Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with psychosomatic outpatients with persistent somatic symptoms (PSS) after they were randomized to view one of three psychoeducational videos on a tablet computer: a) an explanatory model without personalization or b) an explanatory model with personalization in the two experimental groups or c) PSS guidelines without an explanatory model in the control group. Qualitative interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and analyzed applying thematic analysis.Results: Seventy-five patients with PSS were allocated to the study arms, mean duration of interviews was 8.19 min (SD = 3.19, range 4.02-19.49 min). Although all participants gave positive feedback regardless of their allocated study arm, those in the explanatory model without and with personalization groups were especially likely to rate the psychoeducational interventions as helpful. Results highlighted previous illness course, symptom perceptions and patient characteristics as key factors related to patients' response to the video in-terventions and optimal personalization of the explanatory model.Conclusion: The present study not only demonstrated the acceptance of all three psychoeducational interventions developed within the HERMES study, but also provided valuable insights into potential key factors that may increase their impact and potential starting points for tailored psychoeducation in patients with PSS.

Objective: This three-arm randomized controlled trial aimed to test the efficacy of an etiological model for persistent somatic symptoms (PSS) translated into video-animated explanatory models in comparison to a control group, and to examine additional value of personalization of the explanatory models (i.e. possibility to choose information based on mechanisms of symptom persistence). Methods: Outpatients with PSS were shown one of three 15-min video animations: a) explanatory model without personalization, b) explanatory model with personalization, c) no explanatory model control group. Changes in somatic symptom severity (PHQ-15) and psychological burden related to somatic symptoms or associated health concerns (SSD-12) from baseline to one-month follow-up were the primary outcome. Health-related quality of life (SF-12) and perceived usefulness (USE) were also assessed. Results: Seventy-five patients with PSS were allocated to the study arms (Mage = 44.2 & PLUSMN; 13.3 years, 56% female). The study arms did not differ significantly on the primary outcomes. However, no explanatory model participants reported significantly greater mental quality of life improvements than explanatory model without personalization participants (Mdiff = 7.50 [0.43; 14.56]). Further, explanatory model with personalization participants rated the individual fit of the intervention significantly higher than no explanatory model participants (Mdiff = 2.05 [0.17; 3.93]). All groups rated credibility of the intervention as very high. Conclusion: The HERMES materials seemed to have been too brief to improve symptom related outcomes. However, all three interventions were positively evaluated regarding their usefulness, particularly in case of additional personalization. Future studies should investigate potential effects of an increased intervention dose. Trial registration: DRKS00018803.

Background: Back pain has a high global prevalence and carries a substantial risk for chronification. Biopsychosocial factors are assumed to be critical in the transition from acute to chronic back pain. Digital interventions are a promising tool to educate patients about their complaints. Thus, providing patients with an explanatory model regarding their individual risk factors in the early stage of their complaints via the internet might thus be a valuable approach in treatment. Objectives: The objectives of the present online study are to investigate the influence of a personalized psychoeducational intervention on self-efficacy and functioning and to examine biopsychosocial risk factors for symptom chronification. The intervention is based on a current model summarizing the empirical knowledge on relevant factors for persistent somatic symptoms, which has not been studied in back pain patients yet. Methods: An observational cohort of patients with acute and subacute back pain (N = 564) will be asked about biopsychosocial risk factors via online survey at baseline, 4-week, and 12-week follow-up. Within this cohort, a randomly selected group of 132 participants (intervention group) with psychological burden (MCS-12 score of the SF-12 <= 50) and relevant somatic symptom intensity and interference (mean sum score of two numeric rating scales >= 5) and no prior psychotherapeutic treatment will be offered a personalized explanatory model in the form of an animated psychoeducational video. The video will be personalized in terms of participants' individual symptom profile and will be made accessible to watch online for 7 days. Participants will be compared to a control group receiving no treatment regarding change in pain-specific self-efficacy after 1 month as primary outcome, and change in functioning after 1 and 3 months, respectively, as secondary outcomes. Acceptance and usefulness of the intervention will be evaluated using the number of video views and a numeric rating scale. Discussion: This is the first investigation of a personalized, video-animated online psychoeducation based on patients' individual risk factors for the chronification of back pain and the first systematic evaluation of the risk factors included in a comprehensive aetiological model on persistent somatic symptoms in back pain patients. This way, this study contributes to the understanding of cross-disorder psychopathological factors and a stronger consideration of biopsychosocial factors in the treatment of persistent somatic symptoms. If proven effective, the internet-based intervention will make an important contribution to the early treatment of back pain. Ethical approval: The study was approved by the Local Psychological Ethics Committee (LPEK) at the Center for Psychosocial Medicine of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf. Trial registration: The study was registered at the German Clinical Trials Register in December 2021 (registration trial number: DRKS00025445).

Objective The diagnostic criteria of somatic symptom disorder (SSD) emphasize that somatic symptoms receive disease value once they are accompanied by excessive thoughts, feelings, or behaviors. The main objective of this study was to examine what constitutes excessiveness in psychological reactions to somatic complaints and how excessive symptom-related behavior influences self-reported health status and health care utilization. Methods A national, representative general population survey was performed between January and March 2016 in Germany, including 2395 individuals older than 13 years. Self-report questionnaires (Somatic Symptom Scale-8, Somatic Symptom Disorder-B Criteria Scale) were used to operationalize the SSD criteria. Group differences in the daily amount of time dedicated to physical complaints were analyzed between individuals with and without SSD. Stepwise linear regression analyses were performed to predict general mental and physical health status, and health care utilization. Results There was a significant effect of group (SSD yes/no) in daily time spent on symptoms, after controlling for age, sex, depression, and anxiety (F(1,2336) = 447.53, p < .001). The SSD group (n = 213) reported an average of 4 hours, whereas individuals without SSD reported 30 minutes. Results of the regression analyses showed that the combination of somatic symptoms and symptom-related psychological features is predictive of worsened self-reported physical and mental health status, and increased health care utilization. Conclusions A range of 3 to 4 hours per day spent on dealing with physical complaints seems indicative of excessiveness. If, during a clinical consultation, a patient reports such a large amount of time, a more comprehensive clinical examination of SSD should follow.

Objective: The BDS checklist is a self-report measure to assess the most common somatic symptoms in functional somatic syndromes, based on the diagnostic concept of Bodily Distress Syndrome. The aim of the study was to examine the psychometric properties and validity of the BDS checklist in a psychosomatic sample and to investigate whether it is suitable to detect DSM-5 somatic symptom disorders (SSD). Method: In a cross-sectional study, n = 368 patients from a psychosomatic outpatient clinic completed the BDS checklist and a semi-structured clinical interview on SSD. Item and scale characteristics and measures of reliability and validity were determined. Results: The BDS checklist showed good item characteristics and reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.89). Factor analysis confirmed four symptom clusters (CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.091, 90% CI = 0.085-0.097). The BDS total score showed significant correlations with other measures of somatic symptom burden (r = 0.79, p < .001), health anxiety (r = 0.46, p < .001), depression (r = 0.45, p < .001), and general anxiety (r = 0.41, p < .001). Higher BDS checklist scores were associated with higher physical and mental health impairment and higher health care use. Diagnostic accuracy regarding somatic symptom disorder was moderate (AUC = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.67-0.77). Conclusion: Findings of our study indicate that the BDS checklist is a reliable and valid measure to assess the most common somatic symptoms in a psychosomatic setting. It is however not sufficient to detect persons at risk for somatic symptom disorder. A combination with further questionnaires could probably improve diagnostic accuracy.

Introduction Persistent 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 analysis In 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 dissemination Ethics 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 number DRKS00018803.

Background: Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders (SSD) were introduced by DSM-5 in order to improve the classification of somatoform disorders. There is a lack of longitudinal studies on course and predictors of SSD. The present study investigates the natural course of SSD in a four-year follow-up study in patients from a psychosomatic outpatient clinic. Material and methods: At baseline, n = 360 outpatients completed a semi-structured clinical interview to assess SSD, and additional self-report questionnaires (SSS-8, SSD-12, PHQ-8, GAD-7, SF-12). 112 patients were reassessed after four years. Persistence rate and predictors for persisting SSD were evaluated. Results: The prevalence rate of SSD at baseline was 51.8%, and 47.3% at follow-up. We found a persisting SSD in 30.4% (n = 34) of the patients, a remission rate of 21.4% (n = 24) and an incidence rate of 16.9% (n = 19). 31.3% (n = 35) of the sample never received a SSD diagnosis. Significant predictors for persistence were a high psychological burden through somatic symptoms (OR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.01-1.26) and general anxiety (OR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.01-1.88) at baseline. Conclusion: This study indicates that SSD is highly prevalent and persistent in patients from a psychosomatic setting. Our findings indicate that psychological and behavioral factors contribute to the maintenance of SSD and present potential targets for interventions. Future interventions for SSD could potentially be optimized by addressing psychological processes such as catastrophic thinking styles and symptom focusing.

Background: Effective treatment requires regular follow-up and monitoring of symptoms. We investigated sensitivity to change and minimal clinically important difference of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD7). Methods: This study included all participants from a multisite trial of chronic depression. Baseline and follow-up (12 and 48 weeks) data were used to assess treatment response. Effect sizes (ES) and standardized response means (SRM) of pre- and post-GAD-7 mean changes were calculated for subgroups of patients, who did or did not improve according to ratings in the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-24). Results: N = 261 patients were included in the analyses. In the subgroup of patients who improved according to HRSD-24, GAD-7 scores were significantly lower after 12 weeks (t = - 6.31, df = 120, p < .001; ES = - 0.51, SRM = - 0.57), and 48 weeks of treatment (t = - 12.68, df = 141, p < .001; ES = -1.0, SRM = -1.7), when compared to admission. In the group who worsened, GAD-7 scores were significantly higher after 12 weeks (t = 2.96, df = 41, p = .005; ES = 0.30, SRM = 0.46), and increased after 48 weeks (t = 1.99, df = 21, p = .059; ES = 0.37, SRM = 0.43), when compared to baseline. The unchanged group showed no significant difference between baseline and follow-up. MCID was estimated 4 points on the GAD-7 total score. Limitations: Confirmation of these findings and further investigation of the GAD-7 in populations and trials focusing on anxiety-specific treatment is highly recommended. Conclusions: Results show that the GAD-7 is sensitive to detect change in psychopathology over the course of treatment.

Background The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) introduced somatic symptom and related disorders (SSD) to improve the diagnosis of somatoform disorders. It is unclear whether existing questionnaires are useful to identify patients with SSD. Our study investigates the diagnostic accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15) and the Somatic Symptom Scale-8 (SSS-8) in combination with the Somatic Symptom Disorder – B Criteria Scale (SSD-12). Methods For this cross-sectional study, participants were recruited from a psychosomatic outpatient clinic. PHQ-15, SSS-8, and SSD-12 were administered and compared with SSD criteria from a diagnostic interview. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for optimal individual and combined cutpoints. Receiver operator curves were created and area under the curve (AUC) analyses assessed. Results Data of n = 372 patients [31.2% male, mean age: 39.3 years (s.d. = 13.6)] were analyzed. A total of 56.2% fulfilled the SSD criteria. Diagnostic accuracy was moderate for each questionnaire (PHQ-15: AUC = 0.70; 95% CI = 0.65–0.76; SSS-8: AUC = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.66–0.77; SSD-12: AUC = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.69–0.80). Combining questionnaires improved diagnostic accuracy (PHQ-15 + SSD-12: AUC = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.72–0.82; SSS-8 + SSD-12: AUC = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.74–0.84). Optimal combined cutpoints were ⩾9 for the PHQ-15 or SSS-8, and ⩾23 for the SSD-12 (sensitivity and specificity = 69% and 70%). Conclusions The combination of the PHQ-15 or SSS-8 with the SSD-12 provides an easy-to-use and time- and cost-efficient opportunity to identify persons at risk for SSD. If systematically applied in routine care, effective screening and subsequent treatment might help to improve quality of life and reduce health care excess costs.