Abstract
Background: The association between somatic symptoms and psychiatric co-morbidities remains unexplored among patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) in Asian populations. This study aims to bridge this gap by investigating psychiatric morbidities and their determinants among patients presenting with MUPS in an Indian setup.
Methodology: This cross-sectional study, conducted in the outpatient department (OPD) of a tertiary care hospital in India, assessed 200 patients diagnosed with MUPS. Assessment tools, such as the Somatic Symptom Scale (SSS-8), Presumptive Stressful Life Event Scale (PSLES), and Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS), were administered to collect data.
Results: The study examined patients (mean age 36.51±9.82 years), predominantly comprising females (67.5%), presenting with MUPS. Common presenting symptoms were general (96.3%), musculoskeletal pain (91.7%), and gastrointestinal symptoms reported by 81.7%. Medium somatic symptom severity (57%) was more prevalent in females. Prevalent psychiatric co-morbid conditions included depression (mild: 22.0%, moderate: 26.5%), moderate anxiety (41.5%), and moderate stress (26%). Strong associations were observed between the SSS-8 score and depression (χ²(6, N = 200) = 49.26, p < 0.001), anxiety (χ²(8, N = 200) = 37.90, p < 0.001), stress (χ²(6, N = 200) = 44.45, p < 0.001), and the experience of stressful life events (χ²(3, N = 200) = 6.5, p < 0.05).
Conclusion: The study indicates an intertwined association between MUPS and psychiatric disorders. Individuals with MUPS commonly experience heightened anxiety and depression, emphasizing the complex interplay between somatic symptoms and emotional well-being. Consideration of environmental and social factors may be crucial for a comprehensive understanding.
Keywords: stressful life events, cross-sectional survey, somatic symptoms severity, psychiatric comorbidities, medically unexplained physical symptoms
Introduction
Medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) pose a significant healthcare challenge, marked by somatic complaints persisting without a definitive medical diagnosis despite exhaustive evaluations [1]. This diagnostic uncertainty often leaves patients without clear treatment plans, fostering frustration and distress, thereby exacerbating both somatic and psychological distress and significantly affecting overall well-being [2,3].
The intricate interplay between stressors, somatic symptoms, and psychiatric comorbidities highlights the multifaceted nature of MUPS [4], often resulting in heightened anxiety, depression, and functional impairment [5]. Traumatic life events, such as childhood adversity and interpersonal conflicts, are pivotal in both the onset and perpetuation of MUPS [6], contributing to its complexity. Studies worldwide have explored the association between somatic complaints and psychological comorbidities among MUPS patients. Barsky and Borus elucidated a bidirectional relationship between somatic symptoms and psychiatric disorders, indicating how psychological distress can manifest as physical symptoms and vice versa [7]. Similarly, Kroenke et al. demonstrated high rates of depression, anxiety, and stress among individuals with MUPS, suggesting a significant overlap between somatic and psychological domains [8].
These findings emphasize the significance of addressing both physical and psychological aspects in MUPS management for holistic care. However, it is vital to recognize that the severity and expression of somatic symptoms and related psychological factors are shaped by the socio-cultural context of each population. Thus, adopting a tailored approach rather than a one-size-fits-all strategy is imperative to understand MUPS [9].
Despite the significant occurrence of MUPS among Asian outpatient department (OPD) attendees, research into the severity of somatic symptoms and psychiatric comorbidities in Asian countries remains limited [10,11]. The burden of managing MUPS further emphasizes the necessity of addressing both its physical and psychological dimensions for comprehensive care [12,13]. Therefore, our study aims to bridge this gap by investigating the association between somatic symptoms, psychiatric morbidities, and psychological characteristics of individuals diagnosed with MUPS in an Indian setup.
Materials and methods
Study design
This cross-sectional study was conducted in the Medicine OPD of a tertiary care hospital in North India. Ethical approval was obtained from the Institution Ethics Committee (IEC PG-715/25.11.2021, OT-02/24.03.2022).
Study participants
Two hundred patients visiting the Medicine OPD were evaluated for MUPS following specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria comprised patients diagnosed with MUPS, aged 18-60 years with no gender-based exclusion, and were willing to participate. MUPS were characterized as physical symptoms that lack an identifiable organic cause despite rigorous medical evaluation. Exclusion criteria included individuals with neurological or severe medical conditions hindering participation, previously diagnosed psychiatric disorders, and those with sufficient medical explanations for symptoms. Purposive sampling was used, with patients referred by clinicians after a comprehensive examination and evaluation.
Survey questionnaire
A proforma designed for this study recorded sociodemographic data, including age, gender, marital status, educational level, employment status, and occupation. The following scales were administered to assess psychiatric comorbidities and the psychological characteristics of the patients:
Somatic Symptom Scale-8 (SSS-8)
The SSS-8 includes eight items that measure the severity and impact of somatic symptoms over the past seven days. The SSS-8 exhibits good reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.81), demonstrates high content validity from the PHQ-15, positive associations with depression and anxiety, and a stable factor structure across demographics, establishing it as a concise and valid tool for assessing somatic symptoms [14].
Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-21)
The DASS-21 is a self-report questionnaire designed to measure levels of depression, anxiety, and stress. It demonstrates good reliability and validity, with Cronbach's α coefficients ranging from 0.88 to 0.94. The DASS-21 is widely used in research and clinical settings to assess three negative emotional states accurately [15].
Presumptive Stressful Life Events Scale (PSLES)
The PSLES is a reliable measure designed to assess stressful life events experienced by individuals, adapted from the Holmes and Rahe Social Readjustment Rating Schedule. With 51 defined life events, it has been reconstructed and standardized for the Indian population, demonstrating high reliability (0.87) and validity in studies related to both mental and physical health [16]. This comprehensive toolkit facilitated a thorough assessment of the psychological and psychiatric comorbidities of the patients.
Data collection
Patients diagnosed with MUPS were directed by clinicians in the OPD to a designated room for systematic data collection, ensuring patient privacy. Trained medical professionals conducted the process, briefing patients about the purpose of the study, and obtaining written consent. This structured approach upheld ethical standards and facilitated comprehensive data collection while prioritizing patient confidentiality.
Statistical analysis
Categorical variables were presented as absolute and relative frequencies, and continuous variables as mean with standard deviation. The association between variables was assessed using chi-square and Fisher exact tests. The statistical analysis aimed to uncover relationships and patterns within the collected data, providing insights into the interplay of psychiatric comorbidities among individuals diagnosed with MUPS. The analysis was considered statistically significant at p < 0.05.
Results
Socio-demographic and medical characteristics of the patients
The socio-demographic profile of patients diagnosed with MUPS in the OPD of medicine is delineated in Table 1. The average age of patients was 36.51±9.82 years, demonstrating a notable female preponderance, constituting approximately 68% of the total sample. Regarding socioeconomic status (SES), the majority came from lower-middle-class households (42%), followed by 37.5% from upper-lower-class backgrounds (Table 1).
Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of the patients (N=200).
| Socio-demographic characteristics | n (%) |
| Age (36.51±9.82 years) | |
| <20 years | 7 (3.5) |
| 20-40 years | 113 (56.5) |
| 40-60 years | 80 (40) |
| Gender | |
| Female | 135 (67.5) |
| Male | 65 (32.5) |
| Marital status | |
| Married | 159 (79.5) |
| Unmarried | 40 (20) |
| Widowed | 1 (0.5) |
| Socioeconomic status | |
| Lower class | 6 (3) |
| Upper lower class | 75 (37.5) |
| Lower middle class | 84 (42) |
| Upper middle class | 34 (17) |
| Upper class | 1 (0.5) |
Among patients presenting with MUPS, 96.3% reported experiencing general somatic complaints, with musculoskeletal tension symptoms emerging as the predominant manifestation reported by 92% of the patients. Furthermore, 81.7% reported gastrointestinal symptoms, while headaches also emerged prevalent concern, reported by 89% of the patients (Table 2).
Table 2. Common presenting symptoms of the patients (N=200).
GI = Gastrointestinal
| Common presenting symptoms | Frequency (%) |
| Cardiopulmonary symptoms (palpitations, discomfort, breathlessness, sweating) | 56 |
| GI Symptoms (abdominal pains, feeling bloated, diarrhea, nausea) | 81.7 |
| Musculoskeletal symptoms (pains, joint pain, weakness, backache, numbness or tingling sensations) | 91.7 |
| General symptoms (concentration difficulties, fatigue) | 96.3 |
| Headaches | 89 |
Association of psychological characteristics with socio-demographic characteristics
The relationship between the psychological parameters of patients diagnosed with MUPS and their corresponding sociodemographic characteristics is illustrated in Table 3. This table presents a comprehensive overview of how various psychological factors, such as depression, anxiety, and stress levels, are influenced by demographic variables including age, gender, and SES among patients diagnosed with MUPS.
Table 3. Association of psychological parameters with socio-demographic characteristics.
SSS-8 = Somatic Symptom Scale - 8, DASS-21 = Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale, PSLES - Presumptive Stressful Life Event Scale
p = 0.001* = statistically significant at p<0.001, as determined by chi-square test.
p = 0.011* = statistically significant at p<0.01, as determined by chi-square test.
p < 0.05*= statistically significant at p<0.05, as determined by chi-square test.
| Scales | Socio-demographic characteristics (N=200) | |||||||
| Age (N=200) (Mean±SD) | Gender, n (%) | SES, n (%) | ||||||
| Male (n=65) | Female (n=135) | Lower (n=6) | Upper lower (n=75) | Lower middle (n=84) | Upper middle (n=34) | Upper (n=1) | ||
| SSS-8 | ||||||||
| Low (n=31) | 35.03±9.6 | 24 (36) | 7 (6) | 1 (16) | 6 (8) | 17 (20) | 7 (21) | 0 (0) |
| Medium (n=103) | 35.93±9.5 | 26 (40) | 77 (57) | 5 (84) | 45 (60) | 37 (44) | 15 (44) | 1 (100) |
| High/very high (n=66) | 38.0±10.2 | 15 (24) | 51 (37) | 0 (0) | 24 (32) | 30 (36) | 12 (35) | 0 (0) |
| P-value | p=0.27 | p=0.001* | p=0.116 | |||||
| DASS-21 | ||||||||
| Depression | ||||||||
| Normal (n=92) | 36.2±10.0 | 38 (58) | 54 (40) | 3 (50) | 30 (40) | 43 (51.2) | 15 (44.1) | 1 (100) |
| Mild (n= 44) | 34.3±9.9 | 17 (26) | 30 (22) | 0 (0) | 18 (24) | 16 (19) | 10 (29.4) | 0 (0) |
| Moderate (n=53) | 37.5±8.6 | 9 (14.5) | 43 (31) | 2 (33.3) | 20 (26.7) | 23 (27.4) | 8 (23.5) | 0 (0) |
| Severe (n=11) | 41.03±11.3 | 1 (1.5) | 10 (7) | 1 (16.7) | 7 (9.3) | 2 (2.4) | 1 (2.9) | 0 (0) |
| Extremely severe (n= 0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| P-value | p =0.760 | p=0.011* | p=0.50 | |||||
| Anxiety | ||||||||
| Normal (n=37) | 36.3±9.0 | 16 (24.6) | 21 (15.6) | 1 (16.7) | 14 (18.7) | 14 (16.7) | 8 (23.5) | 0 (0) |
| Mild (n=58) | 36.4±9.5 | 18 (27.7) | 40 (29.6) | 2 (33.3) | 24 (32) | 25 (29.8) | 6 (17.6) | 1 (100) |
| Moderate (n=83) | 36.1±10.4 | 23 (35.4) | 60 (44.4) | 0 (0) | 30 (40) | 37 (44) | 16 (47.1) | 0 (0) |
| Severe (n=16) | 38.6±9.4 | 6 (9.2) | 10 (7.4) | 3 (50) | 4 (5.3) | 6 (7.1) | 3 (8.8) | 0 (0) |
| Extremely severe (n=6) | 39.2±9.4 | 2 (3.1) | 4 (3) | 0 (0) | 3 (4) | 2 (2.4) | 1 (2.9) | 0 (0) |
| P-value | p=0.88 | p=0.53 | p=0.20 | |||||
| Stress | ||||||||
| Normal (n=84) | 35.03±9.1 | 24 (36.9) | 60 (44.4) | 1 (16.7) | 29 (38.7) | 35 (41.7) | 18 (52.9) | 1 (100) |
| Mild (n=57) | 36.03±10.9 | 24 (36.9) | 33 (24.4) | 1 (16.7) | 23 (30.7) | 24 (28.6) | 6 (17.6) | 0 (0) |
| Moderate (n=52) | 36.03±9.5 | 14 (21.5) | 38 (28.1) | 0 (0) | 18 (24) | 25 (29.8) | 9 (26.5) | 0 (0) |
| Severe (n=7) | 38.03±11.4 | 3 (4.6) | 4 (3) | 4 (66.7) | 5 (6.7) | 0 (0) | 1 (2.9) | 0 (0) |
| Extremely severe (n=0) | 0 | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| P-value | p=0.765 | p=0.25 | p<0.05* | |||||
| PSLES | ||||||||
| Yes events (n=83) | 36.23±9.0 | 24 (37) | 59 (44) | 2 (67) | 33 (44) | 34 (40) | 14 (41) | 0 (0) |
| No events (n=117) | 35.83±9.7 | 41 (63) | 76 (56) | 4 (33) | 42 (56) | 50 (60) | 20 (59) | 1 (100) |
| P-value | p=0.76 | p=0.362 | p=0.8567 | |||||
Prevalence of Somatic Symptom Severity in the Patients
Among 200 patients, 15.5% (n=31) exhibited low symptom severity (scores ranging from 4 to 7), 51.5% (n=103) reported medium symptom severity (scores ranging from 8 to 11), and 33% (n=66) demonstrated high and very high symptom severity (scores ranging from 12 to 15) based on the SSS-8 scoring criteria. Significant gender disparities were observed, with females displaying markedly elevated levels of somatic symptom severity compared to males, χ²(2, N = 200) = 33.58, p < 0.001. Females predominated in the medium and high severity categories relative to males. On the other hand, no statistically significant difference was observed across SES, χ²(8, N = 200) = 8.23, p = 0.116.
Prevalence of Depression, Anxiety, and Stress levels in the patients
The incidence of depression is notably higher among females compared to males, χ²(3, N = 200) = 11.80, p < 0.01. This disparity is particularly pronounced in females, especially in the moderate and severe categories. Analysis of depression levels indicates no substantial differences across SES, χ²(12, N = 200) = 10.43, p = 0.50.
Although the prevalence of anxiety is elevated in females across all levels, the statistical analysis yields no significant difference, χ²(4, N = 200) = 11.8, p = 0.532, indicating that the observed difference lacks statistical significance. Analysis of anxiety levels across SES categories reveals no statistically significant differences, χ²(16, N = 200) = 22.3, p = 0.203.
While assessing stress, there was no statistically significant association between gender and stress levels, χ²(3, N = 200) = 4.06, p = 0.25. Although females tended to experience higher stress levels, particularly in the mild and moderate categories, this disparity lacked statistical significance. An important observation pertains to the association between stress levels and SES, χ²(12, N = 200) = 46.77, p < 0.05. Among SES categories, approximately 30% (n=25) experience moderate stress among the lower-middle-class group, followed closely by upper-lower-class individuals (24%; n=18). Stress severity predominantly presents within the lower-middle class, particularly in the normal and mild categories.
Experience of Stressful Life Events by the Patients
Among the 200 patients included in the study, approximately 42% (n=83) reported experiencing a significant stressful life event at some point in their lives. Among these individuals, females reported more such experiences, comprising 44% (n=59) of the subgroup. Conversely, the majority of patients, constituting 58% (n=117), did not report experiencing any significant stressful life events throughout their lifetime. Analysis revealed no significant statistical differences across gender, χ²(1, N = 200) = 0.83, p = 0.362, and SES, χ²(4, N = 200) = 1.1, p = 0.856.
Association of somatic symptom severity scores with depression, anxiety, and stress levels in patients with MUPS
Table 4 presents the relationship between SSS-8 and levels of depression, anxiety, and stress among 200 participants.
Table 4. Association between somatic symptom severity and depression, anxiety, and stress levels.
p<0.001*= statistically significant at p<0.001, as determined by chi-square test.
| Variables | SSS-8 (N=200), n (%) | |||
| Low (n=31) | Medium (n=103) | High & very high (n=66) | P-value | |
| Depression | ||||
| Normal (n=92) | 26 (83.9) | 56 (54.4) | 10 (15.2) | <0.001* |
| Mild (n=44) | 4 (12.9) | 22 (21.4) | 18 (27.3) | |
| Moderate (n=53) | 1 (3.2) | 21 (20.4) | 31 (47) | |
| Severe (n=11) | 0 (0) | 4 (3.9) | 7 (10.6) | |
| Extremely severe (n=0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
| Anxiety | ||||
| Normal (n=37) | 14 (45.2) | 21 (20.4) | 2 (3) | <0.001* |
| Mild (n=58) | 9 (29) | 35 (34) | 14 (21.2) | |
| Moderate (n=83) | 8 (25.8) | 39 (37.9) | 36 (54.5) | |
| Severe (n=16) | 0 (0) | 6 (5.8) | 10 (15.2) | |
| Extremely Severe (n=6) | 0 (0) | 2 (1.9) | 4 (6.1) | |
| Stress | ||||
| Normal (n=84) | 20 (64.5) | 56 (54.4) | 8 (12.1) | <0.001* |
| Mild (n=57) | 9 (29) | 26 (25.2) | 22 (33.3) | |
| Moderate (n=52) | 2 (6.5) | 18 (17.5) | 32 (48.5) | |
| Severe (n=7) | 0 (0%) | 3 (2.9) | 4 (6.1) | |
| Extremely severe (n=0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
Elevated SSS-8 scores were significantly associated with higher levels of depression, χ²(6, N = 200) = 49.26, p < 0.001. Notably, 47% (n=31) of patients with high and very high symptom severity also reported moderate levels of depression. A similar trend was observed for anxiety, with increasing SSS-8 scores correlating with elevated anxiety levels, χ²(8, N = 200) = 37.90, p < 0.001. Approximately 55% (n=36) of patients with high and very high symptom severity experienced moderate levels of anxiety. Similarly, higher SSS-8 scores were linked to heightened stress levels, χ²(6, N = 200) = 44.45, p < 0.001, where approximately 49% (n=32) of patients with high and very high symptom severity reported moderate stress levels.
Association of somatic symptom severity scores with stressful live events in patients with MUPS
The association between SSS-8 and life events measured by the PSLES among 200 participants has been presented in Table 5. Individuals experiencing high somatic symptom severity (12-15), and very high severity (16-32) reported more traumatic life events compared to those with low (4-7) or medium (8-11) severity. A statistically significant association was observed between somatic symptom severity and the occurrence of life events, χ²(3, N = 200) = 6.5, p < 0.05.
Table 5. Association between somatic symptom severity (SSS-8) and life events measured by the presumptive stressful life events scale (PSLES).
p<0.025*= statistically significant at p<0.05, as determined by chi-square test.
| PSLES | SSS-8 (N=200) | P-value | |||
| Low (4-7) | Medium (8-11) | High (12-15) | Very high (16-32) | ||
| Yes events (n=82) | 7 | 42 | 31 | 2 | <0.025* |
| No events (n=118) | 24 | 61 | 33 | 0 | |
Discussion
MUPS poses a significant challenge in healthcare due to its elusive nature and its burden on patients and healthcare systems [10,17]. Our study sheds light on the association between MUPS and various psychiatric comorbidities and psychological characteristics, as assessed by the SSS-8, DASS, and stressful life events experienced by the patients.
The association between high SSS-8 scores and elevated depression, anxiety, and stress, as evident in our results (p < 0.001), aligns with previous research as well. Elevated scores on the DASS suggest the presence of comorbid psychiatric conditions like depression and anxiety, which can exacerbate or be a consequence of MUPS. The psychological basis for this relationship is that mental health issues can manifest as physical symptoms when no medical explanation is evident. Conversely, the chronic stress and frustration of dealing with persistent and unexplained symptoms can lead to or worsen psychiatric conditions. This cycle can create a feedback loop where psychological and physical symptoms reinforce and sustain each other [18,19]. The bidirectional relationship between MUPS and psychiatric conditions signifies that MUPS may act as both a manifestation and precursor of psychological distress. Recent research supports this bidirectional understanding, suggesting that individuals with psychiatric disorders may be more susceptible to developing MUPS. At the same time, the distress caused by unexplained symptoms can contribute to the onset of psychiatric conditions [7,20].
While it is true that there is evidence suggesting a correlation between somatic symptoms and psychological distress, it is important to consider other factors that may contribute to this association. Some studies have suggested that the relationship between somatic symptoms and psychological distress may be more complex than previously thought [21]. For instance, a study proposed that the association between somatic symptoms and psychological distress may be influenced by individual differences in the cognitive and emotional processing of physical sensations [22]. Additionally, the presence of comorbid psychiatric conditions such as depression and anxiety does not necessarily indicate a causative relationship with MUPS. These conditions may co-occur with MUPS without directly influencing its onset or exacerbation [23].
Previous research has underscored the connection between life events and the emergence of somatic symptoms. This association suggests that stressful life events can precipitate physical symptoms through psychological mechanisms [6]. The psychological basis lies in the stress-response system, where heightened stress levels triggered by life events may lead to somatic symptom expression [24]. Additionally, cognitive and emotional processes play a role, as individuals may interpret and respond to stressors in ways that manifest as physical ailments [25]. Stressful life events, measured by the PSLES, demonstrated a statistically significant association with high SSS-8 scores, underscoring the role of environmental stressors in contributing to MUPS.
Furthermore, while chronic stress and frustration can indeed have a negative impact on mental health, it is essential to consider the potential role of other environmental and social factors in the development and perpetuation of MUPS [26]. For instance, socioeconomic factors, access to healthcare, and cultural influences may also contribute to the experience of unexplained symptoms. Economic disparities may restrict individuals' ability to seek timely medical care, while cultural beliefs may influence symptom perception and healthcare-seeking behaviors [27]. These factors collectively contribute to heightened psychological distress, impacting overall mental well-being and exacerbating the burden of unexplained symptoms [28].
Strengths and limitations
This pioneering study comprehensively investigates the association between MUPS and multiple domains including somatic symptoms, depression, anxiety, stress, and life events, filling a significant research gap within the Asian context. However, potential selection biases from purposive sampling and recall biases regarding stressors may limit generalizability. The confined geographic area and cross-sectional design with 200 patients hinder longitudinal insights. Establishing a cohort is essential for a deeper understanding. The study's implications extend beyond academia, emphasizing the need for holistic interventions and policy initiatives to address the impactful healthcare challenge posed by MUPS effectively.
Conclusions
The study suggests an association between MUPS and psychiatric disorders, implying that MUPS may arise from or exacerbate psychological distress. Those with MUPS frequently experience heightened anxiety, depression, and other mental health challenges, illustrating the intricate link between somatic symptoms and emotional well-being. Additionally, our findings stress the importance of considering environmental and social factors, including gender and SES, to comprehensively understand MUPS.
Acknowledgments
Dr. Abhivandana Pallati and Dr. Amandeep Singh contributed equally to the work.
Appendices
We utilized three widely accepted and standardized assessment tools in our study, as illustrated in Table 6.
Table 6. Brief description of the assessment tools used in the study.
| Name of the tool | Description |
| Somatic Symptom Scale-8 (SSS-8) | The SSS-8 includes eight items that measure the severity and impact of somatic symptoms over the past seven days. The SSS-8 exhibits good reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.81), demonstrates high content validity from the PHQ-15, positive associations with depression and anxiety, and a stable factor structure across demographics, establishing it as a concise and valid tool for assessing somatic symptoms. |
| Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-21) | The Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-21) is a self-report questionnaire designed to measure levels of depression, anxiety, and stress. It demonstrates good reliability and validity, with Cronbach's α coefficients ranging from 0.88 to 0.94. The DASS-21 is widely used in research and clinical settings to assess negative emotional states accurately. |
| Presumptive Stressful Life Events Scale (PSLES) | The Presumptive Stressful Life Events Scale (PSLES) is a reliable measure designed to assess stressful life events experienced by individuals, adapted from the Holmes and Rahe Social Readjustment Rating Schedule. With 51 defined life events, it has been reconstructed and standardized for the Indian population, demonstrating high reliability (0.87) and validity in studies related to both mental and physical health. |
Disclosures
Human subjects: Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. Institute Ethics Committee of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, New Delhi, India issued approval IEC PG-715/25.11.2021. The cross-sectional study was conducted at the Medicine Outpatient Department (OPD) of a tertiary care hospital in North India. Ethical approval was obtained from the Institution Ethics Committee (IEC PG-715/25.11.2021, OT-02/24.03.2022). .
Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue.
Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following:
Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work.
Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work.
Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
Author Contributions
Concept and design: Piyush Ranjan, Gaurishanker Kaloiya
Critical review of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Piyush Ranjan, Siddharth Sarkar, Gaurishanker Kaloiya, Upendra Baitha, Ashish D. Upadhyay, Amandeep Singh, Bindu Prakash, Ranveer S. Jadon
Supervision: Piyush Ranjan, Gaurishanker Kaloiya, Ranveer S. Jadon
Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Abhivandana Pallati, Nandini Rawat, Siddharth Sarkar, Upendra Baitha, Ashish D. Upadhyay, Amandeep Singh, Bindu Prakash, Ranveer S. Jadon
Drafting of the manuscript: Abhivandana Pallati, Nandini Rawat
References
- 1.Development and validation of a symptom scale for Indian patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms. Aakansha Aakansha, Singh A, Ranjan P, et al. Cureus. 2024;16:0. doi: 10.7759/cureus.55956. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Perspectives of patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals in Indian context: a qualitative study on Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms (MUPS) Singh A, Ranjan P, Kumari A, et al. J Educ Health Promot. 2023;12:119. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_1513_22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Evaluation of tools to assess symptoms and symptom severity in patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms: a systematic review and narrative synthesis. Kuanar Baboo AG, Ranjan P, Kaur T, et al. Cureus. 2024;16:0. doi: 10.7759/cureus.56204. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Beyond somatisation: a review of the understanding and treatment of medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) Burton C. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1314551/ Br J Gen Pract. 2003;53:231–239. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.The association between medically unexplained physical symptoms and health care use over two years and the influence of depressive and anxiety disorders and personality traits: a longitudinal study. den Boeft M, Twisk JW, Terluin B, et al. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16:100. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1332-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Childhood determinants of adult psychiatric disorder. Fryers T, Brugha T. Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health. 2013;9:1–50. doi: 10.2174/1745017901309010001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Functional somatic syndromes. Barsky AJ, Borus JF. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130:910–921. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-130-11-199906010-00016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Physical symptoms in primary care. Predictors of psychiatric disorders and functional impairment. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Linzer M, Hahn SR, deGruy FV 3rd, Brody D. Arch Fam Med. 1994;3:774–779. doi: 10.1001/archfami.3.9.774. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Psychological interventions for medically unexplained physical symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Kaur T, Ranjan P, Sarkar S, Kaloiya GS, Khan M, Aakansha Aakansha, Bhatia H. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2022;77:92–101. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2022.04.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Estimated prevalence of medically unexplained physical symptoms in the medicine outpatient department of a tertiary care hospital in India. Baitha U, Deb KS, Ranjan P, et al. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2019;61:47–52. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2019.10.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Association of somatic symptom severity with sociodemographic parameters in patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms: a cross-sectional study from a tertiary care center in India. Baitha U, Ranjan P, Deb KS, et al. Cureus. 2020;12:0. doi: 10.7759/cureus.9250. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Yoga therapy for medically unexplained physical symptoms. Kashyap A, Chopra S, Ranjan P, Sarkar S, Poorna A, Baitha U. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32277750/ Adv Mind Body Med. 2020;34:17–21. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Comprehensive treatment module for medically unexplained physical symptoms - a guide for general practitioners. Goel A, Ranjan P, Klanidhi KB, et al. Cureus. 2021;13:0. doi: 10.7759/cureus.16263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.The somatic symptom scale-8 (SSS-8): a brief measure of somatic symptom burden. Gierk B, Kohlmann S, Kroenke K, Spangenberg L, Zenger M, Brähler E, Löwe B. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:399–407. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.12179. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Depression Anxiety Stress Scales. [ Jul; 2024 ];Lovibond SH, Lovibond PF. https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Ft01004-000 Sydney: Psychology Foundation. 1995 2nd ed [Google Scholar]
- 16.Presumptive stressful life events scale (PSLES) - a new stressful life events scale for use in India. Singh G, Kaur D, Kaur H. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3012215/pdf/IJPsy-26-107.pdf. Indian J Psychiatry. 1984;26:107–114. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.The resource utilisation of medically unexplained physical symptoms. Lee K, Johnson MH, Harris J, Sundram F. SAGE Open Med. 2016;4:2050312116666217. doi: 10.1177/2050312116666217. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Understanding the somatic consequences of depression: biological mechanisms and the role of depression symptom profile. Penninx BW, Milaneschi Y, Lamers F, Vogelzangs N. BMC Med. 2013;11:129. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-11-129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Differential associations of specific depressive and anxiety disorders with somatic symptoms. Bekhuis E, Boschloo L, Rosmalen JG, Schoevers RA. J Psychosom Res. 2015;78:116–122. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2014.11.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Do unexplained symptoms predict anxiety or depression? Ten-year data from a practice-based research network. van Boven K, Lucassen P, van Ravesteijn H, olde Hartman T, Bor H, van Weel-Baumgarten E, van Weel C. Br J Gen Pract. 2011;61:0–25. doi: 10.3399/bjgp11X577981. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.When psychiatric symptoms reflect medical conditions. Welch KA, Carson AJ. Clin Med (Lond) 2018;18:80–87. doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.18-1-80. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Brain structures associated with individual differences in somatic symptoms and emotional distress in a healthy sample. Wei D, Liu Y, Zhuang K, et al. Front Hum Neurosci. 2020;14:492990. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2020.492990. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.The relationship of hypochondriasis to anxiety, depressive, and somatoform disorders. Scarella TM, Laferton JA, Ahern DK, Fallon BA, Barsky A. Psychosomatics. 2016;57:200–207. doi: 10.1016/j.psym.2015.10.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Life event, stress and illness. Salleh MR. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3341916/ Malays J Med Sci. 2008;15:9–18. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Stress and health: psychological, behavioral, and biological determinants. Schneiderman N, Ironson G, Siegel SD. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2005;1:607–628. doi: 10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.1.102803.144141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Mental health symptoms in relation to socio-economic conditions and lifestyle factors--a population-based study in Sweden. Molarius A, Berglund K, Eriksson C, et al. BMC Public Health. 2009;9:302. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-9-302. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Socio-cultural determinants of health-seeking behaviour on the Kenyan coast: a qualitative study. Abubakar A, Van Baar A, Fischer R, Bomu G, Gona JK, Newton CR. PLoS One. 2013;8:0. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.A descriptive study of disability in patients presenting with medically unexplained physical symptoms in a medical OPD setting. Rao GR, Ranjan P, Chadda RK, et al. J Family Med Prim Care. 2019;8:1755–1759. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_223_19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]