Patient characteristics and frequency of bodily distress syndrome in primary care: A cross-sectional study

39Citations
Citations of this article
62Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background; Bodily distress syndrome (BDS) is a newly proposed diagnosis of medically unexplained symptoms, which is based on empirical research in primary care. Aim: To estimate the frequency of BDS in primary care and describe the characteristics of patients with BDS. Design and setting: A cross-sectional study of primary care patients in urban and rural areas of Central Denmark Region. Method: Data were obtained from GP one-page registration forms, patient questionnaires (including a checklist for BDS), and national registers. Results: A total of 1356 primary care patients were included, of whom 230 patients (17.0%, 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 15.0 to 19.1) fulfilled the BDS criteria. BDS was more common among primary care patients aged 41-65 years (odds ratio [OR] = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.3 to 3.0) and was equally frequent among males and females (female sex, OR 0.9, 95% CI = 0.6 to 1.3). Patients with BDS were characterised by poor health-related quality of life (HRQOL) on the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey, that is, physical component summary scores <40 (OR 20.5, 95% CI = 12.9 to 32.4) and mental component summary scores <40 (OR 3.5, 95% CI = 2.2 to 5.6). Furthermore, patients with BDS were more likely to have high scores on the Symptom Checklist for anxiety (OR 2.2, 95% CI = 1.4 to 3.4) and depression (OR 5.1, 95% CI = 3.3 to 7.9), but regression analyses showed that mental morbidity did not account for the poor HRQOL. Conclusion: BDS is common among primary care patients, and patients with BDS have a higher probability of poor HRQOL and mental health problems.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Budtz-Lilly, A., Vestergaard, M., Fink, P., Carlsen, A. H., & Rosendal, M. (2015). Patient characteristics and frequency of bodily distress syndrome in primary care: A cross-sectional study. British Journal of General Practice, 65(638), e617–e623. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp15X686545

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free