Background: As part of conducting a randomized control trial (RCT) to treat chronically high utilizing patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS), we developed the chart rating method reported here to identify and classify MUS subjects. Method: Intended at this point only as a research tool, the method is comprehensive, uses explicit guidelines, and requires clinician raters. It distinguishes primary organic disease patients from those with primary MUS, quantifies medical comorbidities in primary MUS patients, and also distinguishes subgroups among MUS patients that we call somatization (resembles DSM-IV somatoform disorders) and minor acute illness (MAI) which differs from DSM-IV somatoform definitions. Scoring rules are used to generate the diagnoses above. The rules may be set according to the investigator’s needs, from highly sensitive to highly specific. Results: We found high levels of agreement with the gold standard for MUS vs. organic disease (97.6%) and among raters for the key individual chart elements rated (92–96%). The method identified 206 MUS subjects and the extent of their medical comorbidities for entry into a RCT. It also identified somatization and MAI; the latter supports the validity of this newly reported MAI syndrome. Conclusion: We concluded that this method offered research potential for identifying MUS patients, for quantifying their medical comorbidities, and for classifying MUS subgroups.

Keywords:
Medically unexplained symptoms, Somatization, Somatoform, DSM-IV, Chart review, Chart audit, Minor acute illness
1.
Escobar JI, Manu P, Matthews D, Lane T, Swartz M, Canino G: Medically unexplained physical symptoms, somatization disorder and abridged somatization: Studies with the Diagnostic Interview Schedule. Psychiatr Dev 1989;3:235–245.
2.
Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, deGruy FV, Swindle R: A symptom checklist to screen for somatoform disorders in primary care. Psychosomatics 1998;39:263–272.
3.
Pilowsky I: Diagnostic criteria and classification in psychosomatic research. Psychother Psychosom 1996;65:115–116.
4.
Fava G, Mangelli L, Ruini C: Assessment of psychological distress in the setting of medical disease. Psychother Psychosom 2001;70:171–175.
5.
Muehrer P: Research on co-morbidity, contextual barriers, and stigma. J Psychosom Res 2002;53:843–845.
6.
deGruy F III: Mental Health Care in the Primary Care Setting; in Donaldson MS, Yordy KD, Lohr KN, Vanselow NA (eds): Primary Care – America’s Health in a New Era. Washington, National Academy Press, 1996, pp 285–311.
7.
Klinkman MS, Coyne JC, Gallo S, Schwenk TL: False positives, false negatives, and the validity of the diagnosis of major depression in primary care. Arch Fam Med 1998;7:451–461.
8.
Smith RC, Gardiner JC, Armatti S, Johnson M, Lyles JS, Given CW, Lein C, Given B, Goddeeris J, Korban E, Haddad R, Kanj M: Screening for high utilizing somatizing patients using a prediction rule derived from the management information system of an HMO – A preliminary study. Med Care 2001;39:968–978.
9.
Allison JJ, Wall TC, Spettell CM, Fargason CA, Kobylinski RW, Farmer R, Kiefe C: The art and science of chart review. Jt Comm J Qual Improv 2000;26:115–136.
10.
Cassidy C: Panning for gold: Sifting through chart audit data for patient outcomes. Outcomes Manag Nurs Pract 1999;3:38–42.
11.
Osborne CE, Thompson HC: Criteria for evaluation of ambulatory child health care by chart audit: Development and testing of a methodology. Final report of the Joint Committee on Quality Assurance of Ambulatory Health Care for Children and Youth. Pediatrics 1975;56(suppl 2):625–692.
12.
Fink P: Physical complaints and symptoms of somatizing patients. J Psychosom Res 1992;36:125–136.
13.
Lynch DJ, McGrady A, Nagel R, Zsembik C: Somatization in family practice: Comparing 5 methods of classification. Prim Care Compan J Clin Psychiatry 1999;1:85–89.
14.
Simon GE, Gureje O: Stability of somatization disorder and somatization symptoms among primary care patients. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1999;56:90–95.
15.
Sigal JJ, Paris J, Kardos M, Zimmerman G, Buovino M: Evaluation of some criteria used to select patients for brief psychodynamic therapy. Psychother Psychosom 1999;68:193–198.
16.
Mischoulon D, McColl-Vuolo R, Howarth S, Lagomasino IT, Alpert JE, Nierenberg AA, Fava M: Management of major depression in the primary care setting. Psychother Psychosom 2001;70:103–107.
17.
Nash DB, Goldfield N: Information needs of purchasers; in Nash DB, Goldfield N (eds): Providing Quality Care, the Challenge to Clinicians. Philadelphia, American College of Physicians, 1989, pp 3–23.
18.
Kahn KL, Kosecoff J, Chassin MR: Measuring the clinical appropriateness of a procedure: Can we do it? Med Care 1988;26:415–422.
19.
Winslow C, Solomon DH, Chassin MR, Kosecoff J, Merrick NJ, Brook RH: The appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy. N Engl J Med 1988;318:721–727.
20.
Morrisey JF: The problem of the inappropriate endoscopy. Ann Intern Med 1988;109:605–606.
21.
National Committee on Quality Assurance: Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set and Users’ Manual. HEDIS, 2.0.
22.
Iezzoni LI: Risk adjustment for medical effectiveness research: An overview of conceptual and methodological considerations. J Invest Med 1995;43:136–150.
23.
Frankenfield DL, Marciniak TA, Drass JA, Jencks S: Quality improvement activity directed at the national level: Examples from the Health Care Financing Administration. Qual Manag Health Care 1997;5:12–18.
24.
Smith RC, Gardiner JC, Lyles JS, Johnson M, Rost KM, Luo Z, Goddeeris J, Lein C, Given WE, Given B, Dwamena FC, Collins C, Van Egeren LF, Korban E, Kanj M, Haddad R: Minor acute illness: A preliminary research report of the ‘worried well’. J Fam Pract 2002;51:24–29.
25.
Katon W, Russo J: Somatic symptoms and depression. J Fam Pract 1989;29:65–69.
26.
Sackett DL, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB: Evidence-Based Medicine – How to Practice and Teach EBM. New York, Churchill Livingstone, 1997.
27.
Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW, Wagner EH: Clinical Epidemiology – The Essentials, ed 3. Philadelphia, Williams & Wilkins, 1996.
28.
Klinkman MS, Schwenk TL, Coyne JC: Depression in primary care – More like asthma than appendicitis: The Michigan Depression Project. Can J Psychiatry 1997;42:966–973.
29.
Reid S, Crayford T, Richards S, Nimnuan C, Hotopf M: Recognition of medically unexplained symptoms – Do doctors agree? J Psychosom Res 1999;47:483–485.
30.
Van Hemert AM, Hengeveld MW, Bolk JH, Rooijmans HRM, Vendenbroucke JP: Psychiatric disorders in relation to medical illness among patients of a general medical out-patient clinic. Psychol Med 1993;23:167–173.
31.
Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, deGruy FV, Hahn SR, Linzer M, Williams JBW, Brody D, Davies M: Multisomatoform disorder – An alternative to undifferentiated somatoform disorder for the somatizing patient in primary care. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1997;54:352–358.
32.
Rief W, Hiller W, Geissner E, Fichter MM: A two-year follow-up study of patients with somatoform disorders. Psychosomatics 1995;36:376–386.
33.
Aaronson LS, Burman ME: Use of health records in research: Reliability and validity issues. Res Nurs Health 1994;17:67–73.
© 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel
2003
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.