24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The CIPRUS study, a nurse-led psychological treatment for patients with undifferentiated somatoform disorder in primary care: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Up to a third of patients presenting medically unexplained physical symptoms in primary care may have a somatoform disorder, of which undifferentiated somatoform disorder (USD) is the most common type. Psychological interventions can reduce symptoms associated with USD and improve functioning. Previous research has either been conducted in secondary care or interventions have been provided by general practitioners (GPs) or psychologists in primary care. As efficiency and cost-effectiveness are imperative in primary care, it is important to investigate whether nurse-led interventions are effective as well. The aim of this study is to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a short cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)-based treatment for patients with USD provided by mental health nurse practitioners (MHNPs), compared to usual care.

          Methods

          In a cluster randomised controlled trial, 212 adult patients with USD will be assigned to the intervention or care as usual. The intervention group will be offered a short, individual CBT-based treatment by the MHNP in addition to usual GP care. The main goal of the intervention is that patients become less impaired by their physical symptoms and cope with symptoms in a more effective way. In six sessions patients will receive problem-solving treatment. The primary outcome is improvement in physical functioning, measured by the physical component summary score of the RAND-36. Secondary outcomes include health-related quality of life measured by the separate subscales of the RAND-36, somatization (PHQ-15) and symptoms of depression and anxiety (HADS). Problem-solving skills, health anxiety, illness perceptions, coping, mastery and working alliance will be assessed as potential mediators. Assessments will be done at 0, 2, 4, 8 and 12 months. An economic evaluation will be conducted from a societal perspective with quality of life as the primary outcome measure assessed by the EQ-5D-5L. Health care, patient and lost productivity costs will be assessed with the Tic-P.

          Discussion

          We expect that the intervention will improve physical functioning and is cost-effective compared to usual care. If so, more patients might successfully be treated in general practice, decreasing the number of referrals to specialist care.

          Trial registration

          Dutch Trial Registry, identifier: NTR4686, Registered on 14 July 2014.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1951-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The PHQ-15: validity of a new measure for evaluating the severity of somatic symptoms.

          Somatization is prevalent in primary care and is associated with substantial functional impairment and healthcare utilization. However, instruments for identifying and monitoring somatic symptoms are few in number and not widely used. Therefore, we examined the validity of a brief measure of the severity of somatic symptoms. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) is a self-administered version of the PRIME-MD diagnostic instrument for common mental disorders. The PHQ-15 comprises 15 somatic symptoms from the PHQ, each symptom scored from 0 ("not bothered at all") to 2 ("bothered a lot"). The PHQ-15 was administered to 6000 patients in eight general internal medicine and family practice clinics and seven obstetrics-gynecology clinics. Outcomes included functional status as assessed by the 20-item Short-Form General Health Survey (SF-20), self-reported sick days and clinic visits, and symptom-related difficulty. As PHQ-15 somatic symptom severity increased, there was a substantial stepwise decrement in functional status on all six SF-20 subscales. Also, symptom-related difficulty, sick days, and healthcare utilization increased. PHQ-15 scores of 5, 10, 15, represented cutoff points for low, medium, and high somatic symptom severity, respectively. Somatic and depressive symptom severity had differential effects on outcomes. Results were similar in the primary care and obstetrics-gynecology samples. The PHQ-15 is a brief, self-administered questionnaire that may be useful in screening for somatization and in monitoring somatic symptom severity in clinical practice and research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Consort 2010 statement: extension to cluster randomised trials.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The RAND-36 measure of health-related quality of life.

              The RAND-36 is perhaps the most widely used health-related quality of life (HRQoL) survey instrument in the world today. It is comprised of 36 items that assess eight health concepts: physical functioning, role limitations caused by physical health problems, role limitations caused by emotional problems, social functioning, emotional well-being, energy/fatigue, pain, and general health perceptions. Physical and mental health summary scores are also derived from the eight RAND-36 scales. This paper provides example applications of the RAND-36 cross-sectionally and longitudinally, provides information on what a clinically important difference is for the RAND-36 scales, and provides guidance for summarizing the RAND-36 in a single number. The paper also discusses the availability of the RAND-36 in multiple languages and summarizes changes that are incorporated in the latest version of the survey.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                e.sitnikova@vumc.nl
                sleone@trimbos.nl
                l.zonneveld@amc.uva.nl
                harm.vanmarwijk@manchester.ac.uk
                j.e.bosmans@vu.nl
                j.vanderwouden@vumc.nl
                he.vanderhorst@vumc.nl
                Journal
                Trials
                Trials
                Trials
                BioMed Central (London )
                1745-6215
                3 May 2017
                3 May 2017
                2017
                : 18
                : 206
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0435 165X, GRID grid.16872.3a, Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, , Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, ; Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0835 8259, GRID grid.416017.5, Department of Public Mental Health, , Trimbos Institute: Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, ; Da Costakade 45, 3521 VS Utrecht, The Netherlands
                [3 ]ISNI 0000000084992262, GRID grid.7177.6, Department of Anaesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, , University of Amsterdam, ; Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [4 ]ISNI 0000000121662407, GRID grid.5379.8, Centre for Primary Care, , Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, ; Manchester, UK
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1754 9227, GRID grid.12380.38, Department of Health Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, , Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, ; De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7804-3797
                Article
                1951
                10.1186/s13063-017-1951-2
                5414236
                28468642
                b335c239-ebf7-4d5d-acf4-3fe841f290a2
                © The Author(s). 2017

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 5 December 2016
                : 25 April 2017
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001826, ZonMw;
                Award ID: 837002408
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Study Protocol
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Medicine
                general practice,primary care,problem-solving treatment (pst),undifferentiated somatoform disorder,medically unexplained physical symptoms,cost-effectiveness

                Comments

                Comment on this article