Medically unexplained symptoms in family medicine: defining a research agenda. Proceedings from WONCA 2007

olde Hartman, TC
Hassink-Franke, LJA
Dowrick, C
Fortes, S
Lam, C
van der Horst, HE
Lucassen, PLBJ
van Weel-Baumgarten, EM

^aDepartment of Family Medicine, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
^bDivison of Primary Care, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
^cMedical Psychology and Mental Health Unit, Medical Sciences Faculty, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
^dFamily Medicine Unit, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
^eDepartment of General Practice, VU University Medical Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Received 27 September 2007; Revised 5 June 2008; Accepted 6 June 2008.

Correspondence to TC olde Hartman, 117 Department of General Practice/Family Medicine, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands; Email: [email protected]

Family Practice 25(4):p 266-271, August 2008.

Background

Medically unexplained symptoms (MUSs) are frequently presented in primary care. Unfortunately, knowledge of these patients and/or symptoms in primary care is still limited. Available research comes mainly from Europe and North America, while the perspectives of cultures such as Africa, Asia and South America are relatively unknown. To bring cultural perspectives together, a symposium and workshop on MUS in primary care was held at the WONCA World Conference 2007 in Singapore.

Objective

Main goals of this symposium and workshop—apart from presenting ongoing research and bringing together experts in MUS—were to detect knowledge gaps in MUS and to establish priorities in MUS research. This publication focuses on the proposed research agenda.

Methods

Using a nominal group technique, we generated research topics and set priorities. Research topics were grouped into research themes.

Results

Participants’ (66 researchers and GPs from 29 nationalities) most important research topics were ‘formulating a broadly accepted definition of MUS’, ‘finding a strategy to recognize MUS better and at an earlier stage’, ‘studying the value of self-management and empowerment in patients with MUS’ and ‘finding predictors to decide which strategy will best help the individual patient with MUS’. Priorities in research themes of MUS are as follows: (i) therapeutic options for patients with MUS and (ii) problems in consultations with these patients.

Conclusions

More research on MUS in primary care is needed to improve the consultations with and management of these patients. Internationally primary care conferences are excellent for exchanging ideas and formulating central issues of research.