COVID-19后患者、内科医生、精神科医生或心理学家对疾病严重程度的感知存在实质性差异:健康感知差距及其临床意义

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Michael Ruzicka, Gerardo Jesus Ibarra Fonseca, Simone Sachenbacher, Fides Heimkes, Fabienne Grosse-Wentrup, Nora Wunderlich, Christopher Benesch, Anna Pernpruner, Elisabeth Valdinoci, Mike Rueb, Aline Olivia Uebleis, Susanne Karch, Johannes Bogner, Julia Mayerle, Michael von Bergwelt-Baildon, Marion Subklewe, Bernhard Heindl, Hans Christian Stubbe, Kristina Adorjan
{"title":"COVID-19后患者、内科医生、精神科医生或心理学家对疾病严重程度的感知存在实质性差异:健康感知差距及其临床意义","authors":"Michael Ruzicka, Gerardo Jesus Ibarra Fonseca, Simone Sachenbacher, Fides Heimkes, Fabienne Grosse-Wentrup, Nora Wunderlich, Christopher Benesch, Anna Pernpruner, Elisabeth Valdinoci, Mike Rueb, Aline Olivia Uebleis, Susanne Karch, Johannes Bogner, Julia Mayerle, Michael von Bergwelt-Baildon, Marion Subklewe, Bernhard Heindl, Hans Christian Stubbe, Kristina Adorjan","doi":"10.1007/s00406-023-01700-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) such as the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) or Likert scales addressing various domains of health are important tools to assess disease severity in Post COVID-19 (PC) patients. By design, they are subjective in nature and prone to bias. Our findings reveal substantial differences in the perception of disease severity between patients (PAT), their attending internists (INT) and psychiatrists/psychologists (PSY). Patients rated almost all aspects of their health worse than INT or PSY. Most of the differences were statistically highly significant. The presence of fatigue and mood disorders correlated negatively with health perception. The physical health section of the WHO Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQoL-BREF) and Karnofsky index correlated positively with overall and mental health ratings by PAT and INT. Health ratings by neither PAT, PSY nor INT were associated with the number of abnormal findings in diagnostic procedures. This study highlights how strongly perceptions of disease severity diverge between PC patients and attending medical staff. Imprecise communication, different experiences regarding health and disease, and confounding psychological factors may explain these observations. Discrepancies in disease perception threaten patient-physician relationships and pose strong confounders in clinical studies. Established scores (e.g., WHOQoL-BREF, Karnofsky index) may represent an approach to overcome these discrepancies. Physicians and psychologists noting harsh differences between a patient's and their own perception of the patient's health should apply screening tools for mood disorders (i.e., PHQ-9, WHOQoL-BREF), psychosomatic symptom burden (SSD-12, FCV-19) and consider further psychological evaluation. An interdisciplinary approach to PC patients remains imperative. Trial Registration Number & Date of Registration: DRKS00030974, 22 Dec 2022, retrospectively registered.</p>","PeriodicalId":11822,"journal":{"name":"European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":"2015-2024"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11579184/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Substantial differences in perception of disease severity between post COVID-19 patients, internists, and psychiatrists or psychologists: the Health Perception Gap and its clinical implications.\",\"authors\":\"Michael Ruzicka, Gerardo Jesus Ibarra Fonseca, Simone Sachenbacher, Fides Heimkes, Fabienne Grosse-Wentrup, Nora Wunderlich, Christopher Benesch, Anna Pernpruner, Elisabeth Valdinoci, Mike Rueb, Aline Olivia Uebleis, Susanne Karch, Johannes Bogner, Julia Mayerle, Michael von Bergwelt-Baildon, Marion Subklewe, Bernhard Heindl, Hans Christian Stubbe, Kristina Adorjan\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00406-023-01700-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) such as the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) or Likert scales addressing various domains of health are important tools to assess disease severity in Post COVID-19 (PC) patients. By design, they are subjective in nature and prone to bias. Our findings reveal substantial differences in the perception of disease severity between patients (PAT), their attending internists (INT) and psychiatrists/psychologists (PSY). Patients rated almost all aspects of their health worse than INT or PSY. Most of the differences were statistically highly significant. The presence of fatigue and mood disorders correlated negatively with health perception. The physical health section of the WHO Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQoL-BREF) and Karnofsky index correlated positively with overall and mental health ratings by PAT and INT. Health ratings by neither PAT, PSY nor INT were associated with the number of abnormal findings in diagnostic procedures. This study highlights how strongly perceptions of disease severity diverge between PC patients and attending medical staff. Imprecise communication, different experiences regarding health and disease, and confounding psychological factors may explain these observations. Discrepancies in disease perception threaten patient-physician relationships and pose strong confounders in clinical studies. Established scores (e.g., WHOQoL-BREF, Karnofsky index) may represent an approach to overcome these discrepancies. Physicians and psychologists noting harsh differences between a patient's and their own perception of the patient's health should apply screening tools for mood disorders (i.e., PHQ-9, WHOQoL-BREF), psychosomatic symptom burden (SSD-12, FCV-19) and consider further psychological evaluation. An interdisciplinary approach to PC patients remains imperative. Trial Registration Number & Date of Registration: DRKS00030974, 22 Dec 2022, retrospectively registered.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11822,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2015-2024\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11579184/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-023-01700-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-023-01700-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

患者报告的结果测量(PROMs),如数字疼痛评定量表(NPRS)或李克特量表,涉及各个健康领域,是评估COVID-19 (PC)后患者疾病严重程度的重要工具。在设计上,它们本质上是主观的,容易产生偏见。我们的研究结果揭示了患者(PAT),他们的主治内科医生(INT)和精神科医生/心理学家(PSY)之间对疾病严重程度的感知存在实质性差异。患者对自己健康状况的评价几乎在所有方面都比内测或PSY差。大多数的差异在统计上是高度显著的。疲劳和情绪障碍的存在与健康感知负相关。世界卫生组织生活质量评估(WHOQoL-BREF)的身体健康部分和Karnofsky指数与PAT和INT的整体和精神健康评分呈正相关。PAT、PSY和INT的健康评分与诊断过程中异常发现的数量无关。本研究强调了PC患者和主治医务人员对疾病严重程度的认知差异有多大。不精确的交流,关于健康和疾病的不同经历,以及混杂的心理因素可以解释这些观察结果。疾病认知的差异威胁到医患关系,并在临床研究中造成严重的混淆。已建立的评分(如WHOQoL-BREF、Karnofsky指数)可能是克服这些差异的一种方法。医生和心理学家注意到患者与他们自己对患者健康状况的看法之间存在巨大差异时,应应用情绪障碍筛查工具(即PHQ-9、WHOQoL-BREF)、心身症状负担筛查工具(SSD-12、FCV-19),并考虑进一步的心理评估。对PC患者采取跨学科的治疗方法仍然是必要的。试验注册号和注册日期:DRKS00030974, 2022年12月22日,回顾性注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Substantial differences in perception of disease severity between post COVID-19 patients, internists, and psychiatrists or psychologists: the Health Perception Gap and its clinical implications.

Substantial differences in perception of disease severity between post COVID-19 patients, internists, and psychiatrists or psychologists: the Health Perception Gap and its clinical implications.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) such as the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) or Likert scales addressing various domains of health are important tools to assess disease severity in Post COVID-19 (PC) patients. By design, they are subjective in nature and prone to bias. Our findings reveal substantial differences in the perception of disease severity between patients (PAT), their attending internists (INT) and psychiatrists/psychologists (PSY). Patients rated almost all aspects of their health worse than INT or PSY. Most of the differences were statistically highly significant. The presence of fatigue and mood disorders correlated negatively with health perception. The physical health section of the WHO Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQoL-BREF) and Karnofsky index correlated positively with overall and mental health ratings by PAT and INT. Health ratings by neither PAT, PSY nor INT were associated with the number of abnormal findings in diagnostic procedures. This study highlights how strongly perceptions of disease severity diverge between PC patients and attending medical staff. Imprecise communication, different experiences regarding health and disease, and confounding psychological factors may explain these observations. Discrepancies in disease perception threaten patient-physician relationships and pose strong confounders in clinical studies. Established scores (e.g., WHOQoL-BREF, Karnofsky index) may represent an approach to overcome these discrepancies. Physicians and psychologists noting harsh differences between a patient's and their own perception of the patient's health should apply screening tools for mood disorders (i.e., PHQ-9, WHOQoL-BREF), psychosomatic symptom burden (SSD-12, FCV-19) and consider further psychological evaluation. An interdisciplinary approach to PC patients remains imperative. Trial Registration Number & Date of Registration: DRKS00030974, 22 Dec 2022, retrospectively registered.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
4.30%
发文量
154
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The original papers published in the European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience deal with all aspects of psychiatry and related clinical neuroscience. Clinical psychiatry, psychopathology, epidemiology as well as brain imaging, neuropathological, neurophysiological, neurochemical and moleculargenetic studies of psychiatric disorders are among the topics covered. Thus both the clinician and the neuroscientist are provided with a handy source of information on important scientific developments.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信