Abstract
Aims
A core diagnostic criterion of Somatic Symptom Disorder (SSD) is the excessiveness of distress and time-and-energy consuming thoughts, feelings and behavior pertaining to somatic symptoms. This criterion is lacking in central sensitivity syndromes (CSS), such as fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, and chronic fatigue syndrome. The strong emphasis on disturbed psychological processing of somatic symptoms, suggests that people with SSD have problems with psychological flexibility, defined as
Methods
Questionnaires including the Flexibility Index Test-60 (FIT-60) were answered by people with severe SSD referred to tertiary treatment (n = 154) and people from the general population with CSS (n = 597) and without SSD or CSS (n = 1422). Analyses included adjustments for the demographic covariates gender age, and education level.
Results
Mean (SE) psychological flexibility differed between groups (F = 154.5, p < 0.001, pη2 = 0.13): SSD 166 (3.8), CSS 215 (2.0), controls 234 (1.3). Percentages of people with (very) low psychological flexibility (a large deviation from the norm) were: SSD 74%, CSS 42%, controls 21%. Psychological flexibility in SSD was associated with somatic symptoms (medium effect), physical health (small effect), and mental health (large effect).
Conclusion
Low psychological flexibility is indicated to be a core problem in people with SSD.
A core diagnostic criterion of Somatic Symptom Disorder (SSD) is the excessiveness of distress and time-and-energy consuming thoughts, feelings and behavior pertaining to somatic symptoms. This criterion is lacking in central sensitivity syndromes (CSS), such as fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, and chronic fatigue syndrome. The strong emphasis on disturbed psychological processing of somatic symptoms, suggests that people with SSD have problems with psychological flexibility, defined as
Methods
Questionnaires including the Flexibility Index Test-60 (FIT-60) were answered by people with severe SSD referred to tertiary treatment (n = 154) and people from the general population with CSS (n = 597) and without SSD or CSS (n = 1422). Analyses included adjustments for the demographic covariates gender age, and education level.
Results
Mean (SE) psychological flexibility differed between groups (F = 154.5, p < 0.001, pη2 = 0.13): SSD 166 (3.8), CSS 215 (2.0), controls 234 (1.3). Percentages of people with (very) low psychological flexibility (a large deviation from the norm) were: SSD 74%, CSS 42%, controls 21%. Psychological flexibility in SSD was associated with somatic symptoms (medium effect), physical health (small effect), and mental health (large effect).
Conclusion
Low psychological flexibility is indicated to be a core problem in people with SSD.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 31 |
| Number of pages | 1 |
| Journal | Journal of Psychosomatic Research |
| Volume | 169 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2023 |