Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

D A Drossman

Publications and source records attributed to D A Drossman.

111 records · Page 7Linked to original sources

Effects of coping on health outcome among women with gastrointestinal disorders.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that the nature and quality of coping may positively or negatively affect health outcome; however, this relationship has not been well studied among patients with gastrointestinal (GI) disorders. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to study the effect of different coping strategies on the health outcome of women with GI disorders and how these coping strategies may modify the effects of education, GI disease type, neuroticism, and abuse severity on health outcome. METHODS: We followed 174 patients in a referral GI clinic for 12 months to assess their health status as a derived variable of daily pain, bed disability days, psychological distress, daily dysfunction, number of visits to physicians, and number of surgeries and procedures. We obtained at baseline their GI diagnosis (functional vs. organic), neuroticism score (NEO Personality Inventory), sexual and/or physical abuse history, and scores on two coping questionnaires. Regressions analyses were used to determine the relative effect of the coping measures on health outcome and their modifying effects on education, GI disease type, neuroticism, and abuse severity. RESULTS: A higher score on the Catastrophizing scale and a lower score on the Self-Perceived Ability to Decrease Symptoms scale (Coping Strategies Questionnaire) predicted poor health outcome. Less education, a functional GI diagnosis, a higher neuroticism score, and greater abuse severity also contributed to poor health status. However, the effect of GI disease type and neuroticism on health outcome was significantly reduced by the coping measures. CONCLUSIONS: Maladaptive coping (eg, catastrophizing) and decreased self-perceived ability to decrease symptoms may adversely affect health outcome and may modify the effect of GI disease type and neuroticism on health outcome.

Adaptation, Psychological↗

Teaching psychosomatic (biopsychosocial) medicine in United States medical schools: survey findings.

OBJECTIVE: A survey of US medical schools regarding the incorporation of psychosomatic (biopsychosocial) medicine topics into medical school curriculum was conducted. The perceived importance and success of this curriculum, barriers to teaching psychosomatic medicine, and curricular needs were also assessed. METHODS: From August 1997 to August 1999, representatives of US medical schools were contacted to complete a survey instrument either by telephone interview or by written questionnaire. RESULTS: Survey responses were received from 54 of the 118 US medical schools contacted (46%). Responses were obtained from representatives of both public (57%) and private (43%) institutions. Only 20% of respondents indicated that their schools used the term "psychosomatic medicine"; the terms "behavioral medicine" (63%) and "biopsychosocial medicine" (41%) were used more frequently. Coverage of various health habits (eg, substance use and exercise) ranged from 52% to 96%. The conceptualization and/or measurement of psychosocial factors (eg, stress and social support) was taught by 80% to 93% of schools. Teaching about the role of psychosocial factors in specific disease states or syndromes ranged from 33% (renal disease) to 83% (cardiovascular disease). Coverage of treatment-related issues ranged from 44% (relaxation/biofeedback) to 98% (doctor-patient communication). Topics in psychosomatic medicine were estimated to comprise approximately 10% (median response) of the medical school curriculum. On a scale of 1 (lowest) to 10 (highest), ratings of the relative importance of this curriculum averaged 7 (SD = 2.5; range = 2-10). Student response to the curriculum varied from positive to mixed to negative. Perceived barriers to teaching psychosomatic medicine included limited resources (eg, time, money, and faculty), student and faculty resistance, and a lack of continuity among courses. Sixty-three percent of respondents expressed an interest in receiving information about further incorporation of topics in psychosomatic medicine into their school's curriculum. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this survey reveal variable coverage of specific psychosomatic medicine topics in the medical school curriculum and differential use of nomenclature to refer to this field. There is a need for further curricular development in psychosomatic medicine in US medical schools.

Curriculum↗

Can the primary care physician be better trained in the psychosocial dimensions of patient care?

Our modern health care system has tended to emphasize technological competence and subspecialization. The primary care internist/family physician has recieved limited training in the behavioral aspects of medicine and, resultingly, is less able to obtain and apply the knowledge and skills necessary to effectively help the patient handle those mutually interacting somatic, phychological and sociological dimensions of his illness. Through the use of selected case histories the author has attempted to illustrate how utilization of these skills, obtained during a supervised fellowship program, leads to psychological growth and better understanding of his role as physician. Ultimately this effects clinical improvement in his medical patients with longstanding difficulties.

Education, Medical, Graduate↗