Clinical Practice Guideline
Functional Somatic Symptoms
; ; ; ;
Background: Approximately 10% of the general population and around one third of adult patients in clinical populations suffer from functional somatic symptoms. These take many forms, are often chronic, impair everyday functioning as well as quality of life, and are cost intensive.
Methods: The guideline group (32 medical and psychological professional societies, two patients’ associations) carried out a systematic survey of the literature and analyzed 3795 original articles and 3345 reviews. The aim was to formulate empirically based recommendations that were practical and user friendly.
Results: Because of the variation in course and symptom severity, three stages of treatment are distinguished. In early contacts, the focus is on basic investigations, reassurance, and advice. For persistent burdensome symptoms, an extended, simultaneous and equitable diagnostic work-up of physical and psychosocial factors is recommended, together with a focus on information and self-help. In the presence of severe and disabling symptoms, multimodal treatment includes further elements such as (body) psychotherapeutic and social medicine measures. Whatever the medical specialty, level of care, or clinical picture, an empathetic professional attitude, reflective communication, information, a cautious, restrained approach to diagnosis, good interdisciplinary cooperation, and above all active interventions for self-efficacy are usually more effective than passive, organ-focused treatments.
Conclusion: The cornerstones of diagnosis and treatment are biopsychosocial explanatory models, communication, self-efficacy, and interdisciplinary mangagement. This enables safe and efficient patient care from the initial presentation onwards, even in cases where the symptoms cannot yet be traced back to specific causes.
The German clinical practice guideline on the management of patients with unspecific, functional, and somatoform physical symptoms (1, 2) expired in March 2017. Between November 2016 and July 2018, the guideline was updated and thoroughly revised by a group under the coordination of the German College of Psychosomatic Medicine (Deutsches Kollegium für Psychosomatische Medizin, DKPM) and the German Society of Psychosomatic Medicine and Medical Psychotherapy (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychosomatische Medizin und Ärztliche Psychotherapie, DGPM) and in accordance with the requirements of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (Arbeitsgemeinschaft wissenschaftlicher medizinischer Fachgesellschaften, AWMF). Particular attention was paid to user-friendly language and relevance to daily practice. The long version of the guideline and the guideline methods report are available (in German) on the AWMF website (3). The patient guideline is currently undergoing revision.
Characterization of the clinical picture
- Persistent unspecific symptoms that are burdensome enough for the patient to consult a doctor but are not classified as disease (“medically unexplained symptoms” or “persistent physical symptoms”). These can nevertheless discernibly impair the patient’s everyday functioning.
- Defined symptom clusters present over an extended period in the form of functional somatic syndromes (such as fibromyalgia syndrome or irritable bowel syndrome). These are mostly associated with a significant limitation of everyday functioning.
- Conditions that fulfill the criteria of pronounced (multi)somatoform disorders and the newly defined somatic stress disorders. These presuppose considerable impairment of everyday functioning and are also associated with psychobehavioral symptoms.
Functional somatic symptoms as outlined above are to be distinguished from the commonly occurring transitory indispositions that rarely prompt a visit to the doctor and affect everyday functioning only slightly for a limited time, if at all. These are of no medical significance.
Functional somatic symptoms affect a considerable portion (around 10%) of the general population (e1). In the medical context, rates of 20% to 50% are reported for patients visiting primary care physicians and 25% to 66% in particular specialties (e.g., rheumatology, pain medicine, and gynecology) (e2–e5). Functional somatic symptoms are frequently self-limiting (e6, e7). In at least 20%, more likely 50%, of patients who have multiple somatic symptoms and fulfill the criteria of “(multi)somatoform disorder” or “bodily distress syndrome”, the symptoms are enduring (e8–e11). Over the course of time 50% to 75% of patients report improvement, while in 10% to 30% the symptoms worsen (e10–e12). Life expectancy appears not to be affected, apart from an increased prevalence of suicidal behavior (e13–e17): passive death wishes occur in over half of patients with functional disorders (56%), concrete suicidal thoughts in around one third (24% to 34%); 13% to 18% have attempted to commit suicide earlier in life (e13, e14). Comorbidity with mental disorders (principally anxiety and depression), with a rate of around 50%, occurs just as frequently as the overlapping of different functional syndromes (e18–e28). Moreover, persons with functional somatic symptoms may very well show organic findings, e.g., as normal variants, trivial findings, expression of underlying functional organ dysfunctions, or in the presence of (somatic) illness (comorbidity or differential diagnosis) (4–6, e29, e30). Swift, unambiguous classification of symptoms as functional is therefore rarely possible. The prevailing etiological models of functional disorders and bodily distress postulate a multifactorial genesis with interaction of biological, psychological, and sociocultural factors in predisposition, triggering, and maintenance (Figure 1) (4–6). Functional somatic symptoms generate high healthcare costs (e31–e33).
The guideline was revised by the members of a large, representative group of experts from 32 professional medical and psychological societies and two organizations representing the interests of patients (eBox 1). Evidence was derived from an updated systematic literature survey that identified 3795 clinical studies and 3345 systematic reviews, as well as from all relevant source guidelines (eFigure 1, eTable 1). The Table shows the main results of selected reviews on interventions for functional somatic symptoms. A steering group then formulated 109 recommendations, based on the requirements specified by the AWMF and the Center for Quality in Medicine (Ärztliches Zentrum für Qualität in der Medizin) (e37, e38). These recommendations were discussed by the members of the guideline group as a whole in an online Delphi process and at a consensus conference moderated by the AWMF, modified if deemed necessary, and finally adopted. In almost all cases there was a strong consensus for approval. Balancing the great importance of the particularly high degree of interdisciplinary expert consensus for these recommendations against the heterogeneity of the evidence, all recommendations were implemented as “clinical consensus points” (CCP) with the recommendation level “recommended” (e34–e36) (eFigure 2). A more detailed description of the methods can be found in eBox 2.
Diagnosis and treatment of functional somatic symptoms
Because of the great variability in the course and severity of functional somatic symptoms, the recommendations are grouped into three stages of treatment (Figure 2). Recommendations for the initial stages are still valid for later stages in more severe courses, but are then supplemented by further measures (e39). The assessment of severity is based on the present protective factors and risk factors (green/yellow/red flags) (eBox 3, Figure 2) (1, 2, 4–6, e40, e41). Basic care is carried out by the primary care physician or the appropriate somatic specialist, who then coordinates any multimodal treatment that may be required later.
The guidelines recommend from the outset an integrative approach, with the systematic consideration of both, somatic and psychosocial aspects of the symptoms (“as well/as attitude”), and alignment of the boundaries between general and specialist medical care and between organic and psychosocial medicine (4–6, e42–e44). Inappropriate, superfluous, and obsolete drug treatments and invasive interventions are listed in eBox 4.
Initial basic care
The recommendations for “initial basic care” (Figure 2) advise early consideration of the possible presence of functional somatic symptoms by careful questioning and examination of the patient (consensus: strong; evidence level: weak) (e45–e53). Even in this early stage, diagnostic alertness paired with diagnostic restraint together with empathetic communication of information and reassurance enable a broad diagnostic perspective without fixation on a somatic cause, an informed and calmer attitude on the patient’s side in dealing with the symptoms, and higher treatment satisfaction—and exert a positive impact on the course and prognosis by, for example, amelioration of symptoms and reduced consumption of healthcare resources (consensus) (e54).
Patients should be questioned about their principal symptoms and about any other symptoms or problems. Furthermore, they should be asked how they feel about their symptoms, how the symptoms affect their daily life, and what strategies they use to ease or avoid these symptoms (strong consensus) (4–6, 28, 29, e43, e55). A thorough physical examination should be carried out to detect further findings or limitations (consensus) (4–6, 28, 29, e52, e53). During both the initial conversation and the subsequent physical examination, the physician observes the patient’s behavior (e.g., reluctance to perform certain movements, dramatizing symptoms) (strong consensus) (e56, e57). Based on the (preliminary) findings, any further diagnostic testing should be planned in a systematic and reserved manner and communicated with the patient in a reassuring way (strong consensus) (4–6, 28, 29, e58–e60). On the overall basis of the findings and the information gleaned, signs of an avoidable dangerous course (red flags) or risk factors for a chronic course (yellow flags) are assessed (eBox 3).
If no warning signals are detected, the patient should be reassured, but without playing down or negating the symptoms (strong consensus) (4–6, 28, 29, e44, e47, e54, e61–e64). The credibility of the symptoms and the carefulness and reliability of the physician’s assessment are conveyed without necessarily using a “diagnostic label” (strong consensus). Therapeutic interventions in the stage of initial basic care are generally restricted to encouraging patients to modify their behavior in terms of a healthy, physically active lifestyle (strong consensus) (4–7, 28, 29, e65)—ideally activities that they are familiar with and have benefited from in the past. Additionally, a further appointment in 2 to 4 weeks should be offered if required (strong consensus) (e66–e69), while emphasizing that the symptoms will probably resolve, or that there is no need for concern if they should persist (watchful waiting) (strong consensus) (e70).
Extended basic care
Extended basic care begins if a patient presents again because his/her symptoms have persisted or have started to impair quality of life and everyday functioning. It is carried out predominantly by primary care physicians or appropriate somatic specialists and is divided into two phases (Figure 2):
- Simultaneous diagnostic assessment: extension of physical and psychosocial diagnostic investigations simultaneously and with equal weight (which in itself may have a therapeutic effect)
- From explanatory model to coping: integration of all identified issues/problems into an individual explanatory model, from which coping-oriented treatment measures are derived.
In view of the prognostic relevance of reflective management, the extra time required for extended basic care is well invested (e47).
Simultaneous diagnostic assessment
A somewhat less rushed, customized treatment setting can be achieved by reviewing office organization and billing procedures for ways to dedicate more time to patients; a clear schedule with fixed regular appointments in a calm atmosphere irrespective of symptoms, with the potential for delivering measures of “psychosomatic basic care” and other specific training courses; focused management of these patients by the whole treatment team (strong consensus, evidence level: weak) (4–6, 28, 29, e71–e80).
Careful, attentive listening and questioning, also during physical examinations, strengthen the doctor–patient relationship and yield valuable information about the patient’s previous symptoms and treatments (strong consensus) (e44, e66, e81, e82). If deemed appropriate, clinical and physical examinations should be repeated at regular intervals, also to detect warning signals for (new-onset) somatic disease or any harmful consequences of previous (physical) inactivity or incorrect treatment (strong consensus) (4–6, 28, 29, e46). Well-considered diagnostic testing and prescribing, advance discussion of examinations (including the anticipation of normal findings), and normalizing explanation of the findings are central aspects of a systematic, stepped diagnostic work-up free of redundancies. The goal is to rule out the presence of serious conditions and complications and to recognize when medical action is required—but not necessarily to define a clear cause for each symptom (consensus). Repeated testing, particularly invasive techniques, should be avoided if they serve primarily to reassure the patient and/or the physician (strong consensus) (4–6, 28, 29, e83–e85). If a test is unnecessary, the physician should explain clearly why that is the case; necessary investigations should be announced in reassuring fashion, perhaps mentioning the high likelihood of age-appropriate normal findings (strong consensus) (4–6, 28, 29, e86, e87). Any known previous test results and any incidental or trivial findings with no diagnostic or therapeutic relevance should be interpreted using lay terms, in a reassuring, normalizing manner, with the aid of information materials; occasional “summarizing discussions” can help (re-)evaluate all medical results together with the patient (strong consensus) (e88–e90).
Simultaneous diagnostic assessment concludes with an evaluation of the medical significance of the symptoms and the (suspected) diagnosis/diagnoses, and a decision about further treatment needs. This serves to determine whether treatment is required (strong consensus). If no sound diagnosis can be established, using ICD-10 symptom or health care utilization codes should be preferred over assigning stopgap diagnostic codes (strong consensus).
From explanatory model to coping
Supporting the patient in making individual sense of the symptoms (Box 2) plays a central therapeutic role in the context of extended basic care: Even if the the patient’s own attributions seem one-sided or implausible, step by step a comprehensible biopsychosocial explanatory model should be developed that integrates the patient’s subjective assumptions, taking account of individual risk factors as well as context factors (e.g., mental illness). Based on this individual, multifactorial etiological model, therapeutic goals should be developed, consisting of concrete and realistic small-step goals but also establishing superordinate values and motivators (strong consensus) (4–6, e43, e65–e69, e87). To alleviate the patient’s bodily symptoms, selected symptom-oriented passive measures can be recommended, stressing their generally transitory effects and concomitant role: analgesics, psychopharmaceuticals, as well as primarily peripherally acting medication, passive physical and physiotherapeutic interventions, and passive complementary medicine treatments such as acupuncture and phytotherapy (strong consensus, recommended, evidence level: strong) (eTable 1) (4, 10, 12–17, 21, 24, 26, 27, e91–e105). More sustained effects can be achieved through active coping strategies to reinforce self-efficacy and self-help skills. These include (re)initiating social and particularly physical activity (at the patient’s own initiative, from pleasurable exercise to systematic activation programs; also short-term physiotherapy and ergotherapy), (re)exposure in the case of avoidance and protective behavior, self-help literature and possibly self-help groups, as well as taking advantage of offers beyond the healthcare system, e.g., evening classes, where one is not in the patient role (strong consensus, recommended, evidence level: strong) (eTable 2) (4–7, 9, 10, 19, 22, 24, e100, e106–e108).
Multimodal treatment, psychotherapy, and rehabilitation
The third stage of treatment is required for severe cases with considerable impairment of everyday functioning and high healthcare utilization (Figure 2). It involves further forms of treatment, including psychotherapy and rehabilitation, as required and as available as outpatient, inpatient, or day-care treatment (strong consensus, evidence level: strong) (eTable 3) (4–6, 10, 11, e104, e109, e110). To enable the provision of multimodal treatment, an outpatient treatment network should be established, with the treating primary care physician or somatic specialist remaining the principal coordinator (gatekeeper) (strong consensus, recommended, evidence level: strong) (e111, e112). Any referrals that become necessary, e.g., for psychiatric, psychosomatic, or psychotherapeutic treatment, should be prepared with empathy (4–6).
Particularly in the case of major psychosocial stress factors and/or mental comorbidity, relevant dysfunctional disease models, significant functional impairment, or a persistently conflictual therapist–patient relationship, psychotherapy is recommended (consensus). The efficacy of (cognitive) behavioral therapy, psychodynamic psychotherapy, and hypnotherapy is well substantiated in the literature (strong consensus, recommended, evidence level: strong) (eTable 3) (4–6, 8, 18, 23–25, 30, e113, e114). Further therapeutic elements that have proved efficacious in multimodal treatment models include body-oriented and/or mindfulness-based approaches. Psychotherapy and psychiatric treatments go beyond the usual schemes, so that treatment motivation is the first important treatment goal (strong consensus, recommendation, evidence level: strong) (4–6, 30, e115).
- The altered “embodied self,” i.e., all bodily perceptions, feelings, attitudes, and beliefs
- Dysfunctional experience with one’s own illness, role models, (supposed) serious illness in the patient’s environment, traumatic loss, violence, or neglect
- Potential disease-maintaining factors, primary or secondary gain (such as ongoing conflict situations, desire to retire from work, or compensation payments)
- Mental comorbidities (anxiety, depression, trauma sequelae, addiction, personality disorders (e116).
Psychotherapy for functional somatic symptoms and bodily distress should focus primarily on the somatic symptoms, the existing explanatory model, and symptom-related attitudes and behavior patterns (4–6, 30). The treatment focuses on positive self-perception and body awareness, self-regulation techniques, interpersonal relationships, encouragement of creativity, and openness to change (strong consensus, recommendation, evidence level: weak) (4–6, 30, e43, e117). Psychological aspects of symptom formation and maintenance as well as individual vulnerability factors (context, personality, biography) should be addressed only indirectly, or later in the treatment course.
If outpatient treatment is not possible or proves inadequate, multimodal treatment in a suitable day-care or inpatient facility is indicated. If the focus is on improving participation, including maintenance/restoration of ability to work and thus prevention of (further) chronification, one should consider interdisciplinary rehabilitation with sufficient elements of counseling, psychodiagnostics, and psychotherapy, or alternatively psychodynamic treatment (strong consensus, recommendation, evidence level: weak) (4–6, e118, e119).
Functional somatic symptoms are not defined in the same way as diseases with circumscribed organic pathology. Instead, their course is greatly determined by how the symptoms are experienced, coped with, and responded to by physicians. Therefore, many of the recommendations in the updated guidelines relate to the interaction with affected patients, i.e., the comprehension and modification of the individual symptom context and explanatory model. With few exceptions, active therapeutic interventions designed to promote self-efficacy (especially psychoeducation, relaxation and mindfulness, self-help, and physical activation) carry less risk and have more sustained effects than passive, organ-related measures. In severe cases, multimodal treatment and psychotherapy have been shown to be effective. Drug treatment should be reserved for temporary relief of symptoms or management of comorbidity. Much more research is needed into prevention, psychophysiology, and the differential treatment of patients with different manifestations of functional somatic symptoms.
The authors are grateful to the AWMF and to all colleagues, professional societies, and patient organizations (eBox 1) who helped to compile this revised guideline.
Conflict of interest statement
Dr. Roenneberg, MHBA and Dipl-Psych. Sattel declare that no conflict of interest exists.
Prof. Schäfert has received payment from Springer-Verlag and from the journal Psychotherapeut for authorship.
Prof. Hausteiner-Wiehle and Prof. Henningsen have received payments from the publishers Schattauer and Elsevier for writing textbook chapters on the subject of functional somatic symptoms.
Manuscript received on 18 March 2019, revised version accepted on 12 June 2019
Translated from the original German by David Roseveare
Deutsches Ärzteblatt, in common with many other journals, does not subject German clinical practice guidelines to peer review because they have already been intensively assessed and discussed by experts who have broadly agreed on the final wording.
Dr. med. Casper J. Roenneberg, MHBA
Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychotherapie
Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München
Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675 München, Germany
Cite this as:
Roenneberg C, Sattel H, Schaefert R, Henningsen P, Hausteiner-Wiehle C; on behalf of the guideline group “Functional Somatic Symptoms”: Clinical practice guideline: Functional somatic symptoms. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2019; 116: 553–60. DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2019.0553
For eReferences please refer to:
eBoxes, eFigures, and eTables:
Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM): Dr. Casper Roenneberg, MHBA; Dipl.-Psych. Heribert Sattel, Prof. Peter Henningsen, Prof. Constanze Hausteiner-Wiehle
Department of Psychosomatics, University and University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland: Prof. Rainer Schaefert
Department of General Internal Medicine and Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg: Prof. Rainer Schaefert
Psychosomatic Medicine/Neurocenter, Berufsgenossenschaftliche Unfallklinik Murnau:
Prof. Constanze Hausteiner-Wiehle
|1.||Hausteiner-Wiehe C, Henningsen P, Häuser W, et al.: Umgang mit Patienten mit nicht-spezifischen, funktionellen und somatoformen Körperbeschwerden. S3-Leitlinie mit Quellentexten, Praxismaterialien und Patientenleitlinie. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta (vormals Schattauer) 2013 1 ff.|
|2.||Schaefert R, Hausteiner-Wiehle C, Hauser W, Ronel J, Herrmann M, Henningsen P: Non-specific, functional, and somatoform bodily complaints. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2012; 109: 803–13 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|3.||S3-Leitlinie „Funktionelle Körperbeschwerden“. www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/051-001.html (last accessed on 4 March 2019).|
|4.||Henningsen P, Zipfel S, Sattel H, Creed F: Management of functional somatic syndromes and bodily distress. Psychother Psychosom 2018; 87: 12–31 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|5.||Hausteiner-Wiehle C, Henningsen P: Kein Befund und trotzdem krank? Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta (vormals Schattauer) 2015 CrossRef|
|6.||Henningsen P, Martin A: Somatoforme Störungen, somatische Belastungsstörung. In: Herpertz S, Caspar F, Lieb K, eds.:. Psychotherapie. Funktions- und störungsorientiertes Vorgehen. München: Elsevier 2016 CrossRef|
|7.||van Gils A, Schoevers RA, Bonvanie IJ, Gelauff JM, Roest AM, Rosmalen JG: Self-help for medically unexplained symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychosom Med 2016; 78: 728–39 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|8.||van Dessel N, den Boeft M, van der Wouden JC, et al.: Non-pharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders and medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; (11): CD011142 CrossRef|
|9.||Larun L, Brurberg KG, Odgaard-Jensen J, Price JR: Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; (2): CD003200 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|10.||Winkelmann A, Häuser W, Friedel E, et al.: Physiotherapy and physical therapies for fibromyalgia syndrome. Systematic review, meta-analysis and guideline. Schmerz 2012; 26: 276–86 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|11.||Arnold B, Häuser W, Arnold M, et al.: Multimodale Therapie des Fibromyalgiesyndroms. Systematische Übersicht, Metaanalyse und Leitlinie. Schmerz 2012; 26: 287–90 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|12.||Häuser W, Wolfe F, Tölle T, Uçeyler N, Sommer C: The role of antidepressants in the management of fibromyalgia syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CNS Drugs 2012; 26: 297–307 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|13.||Walitt B, Urrútia G, Nishishinya MB, Cantrell SE, Häuser W: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for fibromyalgia syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; (6): CD011735 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|14.||Cording M, Derry S, Phillips T, Moore RA, Wiffen PJ: Milnacipran for pain in fibromyalgia in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; (10): CD008244 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|15.||Derry S, Cording M, Wiffen PJ, Law S, Phillips T, Moore RA: Pregabalin for pain in fibromyalgia in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 9: CD011790 CrossRef PubMed Central|
|16.||Li YH, Wang FY, Feng CQ, Yang XF, Sun YH: Massage therapy for fibromyalgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One 2014; 9: e89304 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|17.||Yuan QL, Wang P, Liu L, et al.: Acupuncture for musculoskeletal pain: a meta-analysis and meta-regression of sham-controlled randomized clinical trials. Sci Rep 2016; 6: 30675 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|18.||Bernardy K, Klose P, Busch AJ, Choy EH, Häuser W: Cognitive behavioural therapies for fibromyalgia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; (9): CD009796 CrossRef PubMed Central|
|19.||Lauche R, Cramer H, Dobos G, Langhorst J, Schmidt S: A systematic review and meta-analysis of mindfulness-based stress reduction for the fibromyalgia syndrome. J Psychosom Res 2013, 75: 500–10 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|20.||Chao GQ, Zhang S: Effectiveness of acupuncture to treat irritable bowel syndrome: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20: 1871–7 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|21.||Manheimer E, Cheng K, Wieland LS, et al.: Acupuncture for treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; (5): CD005111 CrossRef PubMed Central|
|22.||Aucoin M, Lalonde-Parsi MJ, Cooley K: Mindfulness-based therapies in the treatment of functional gastrointestinal disorders: a meta-analysis. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2014; 2014: 140724 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|23.||Laird KT, Tanner-Smith EE, Russell AC, Hollon SD, Walker LS: Short-term and long-term efficacy of psychological therapies for irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14: 937–47 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|24.||Ford AC, Quigley EM, Lacy BE, et al.: Effect of antidepressants and psychological therapies, including hypnotherapy, in irritable bowel syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2014; 109: 1350–65 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|25.||Schaefert R, Klose P, Moser G, Häuser W: Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of hypnosis in adult irritable bowel syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychosom Med 2014; 76: 389–98 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|26.||Chang L, Lembo A, Sultan S: American Gastroenterological Association Institute Technical Review on the pharmacological management of irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology 2014; 147: 1149–72.e2 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|27.||Li J, Zhu W, Liu W, Wu Y, Wu B: Rifaximin for irritable bowel syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016; 95: e2534 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|28.||Deutsche Schmerzgesellschaft. Definition, Pathophysiologie, Diagnostik und Therapie des Fibromyalgiesyndroms. www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/145-004.html (last accessed on 22 February 2019).|
|29.||Bundesärztekammer (BÄK), Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung (KBV), Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften (AWMF). Nationale VersorgungsLeitlinie Nicht-spezifischer Kreuzschmerz – Kurzfassung, 2nd edition. Version 1. 2017 (last accessed on 22 February 2019).|
|30.||Martin A, Härter M, Henningsen P, Hiller W, Kröner-Herwig B, Rief W: Evidenzbasierte Leitlinie zur Psychotherapie somatoformer Störungen und assoziierter Syndrome (Vol. 4). Göttingen: Hogrefe Verlag 2013.|
|e1.||Hilderink PH, Collard R, Rosmalen JG, Oude Voshaar RC: Prevalence of somatoform disorders and medically unexplained symptoms in old age populations in comparison with younger age groups: a systematic review. Ageing Res Rev 2013; 12: 151–6 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e2.||Nimnuan C, Hotopf M, Wessely S: Medically unexplained symptoms: an epidemiological study in seven specialities. J Psychosom Res 2001; 51: 361–7 CrossRef|
|e3.||Maiden NL, Hurst NP, Lochhead A, Carson AJ, Sharpe M: Medically unexplained symptoms in patients referred to a specialist rheumatology service: prevalence and associations. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2003; 42: 108–12 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e4.||Snijders TJ, de Leeuw FE, Klumpers UM, Kappelle LJ, van Gijn J: Prevalence and predictors of unexplained neurological symptoms in an academic neurology outpatient clinic—an observational study. J Neurol 2004; 251: 66–71 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e5.||de Waal MW, Arnold IA, Eekhof JA, van Hemert AM: Somatoform disorders in general practice: prevalence, functional impairment and comorbidity with anxiety and depressive disorders. Br J Psychiatry 2004; 184: 470–6 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e6.||Verhaak PF, Meijer SA, Visser AP, Wolters G: Persistent presentation of medically unexplained symptoms in general practice. Fam Pract 2006; 23: 414–20 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e7.||Rosendal M, Olde Hartman TC, Aamland A, et al.: „Medically unexplained“ symptoms and symptom disorders in primary care: prognosis based recognition and classification. BMC Fam Pract 2017; 18: 18 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e8.||Lieb R, Zimmermann P, Friis RH, Höfler M, Tholen S, Wittchen HU: The natural course of DSM-IV somatoform disorders and syndromes among adolescents and young adults: a prospective longitudinal community study. Eur Psychiatry 2002; 17: 321–3 CrossRef|
|e9.||Jackson JL, Kroenke K: Prevalence, impact, and prognosis of multisomatoform disorder in primary care: a 5-year follow up study. Psychosom Med 2008; 70: 430–4 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e10.||Steinbrecher N, Hiller W: Course and prediction of somatoform disorder and medically unexplained symptoms in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2011; 33: 318–26 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e11.||Olde Hartman TC, Borghuis MS, Lucassen PL, van de Laar FA, Speckens AE, van Weel C: Medically unexplained symptoms, somatisation disorder and hypochondriasis: course and prognosis. A systematic review. J Psychosom Res 2009; 66: 363–77 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e12.||Budtz-Lilly A, Vestergaard M, Fink P, Carlsen AH, Rosendal M: The prognosis of bodily distress syndrome: a cohort study in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2015; 37: 560–6 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e13.||Wiborg JF, Gieseler D, Fabisch AB, Voigt K, Lautenbach A, Löwe B: Suicidality in primary care patients with somatoform disorders. Psychosom Med 2013; 75: 800–6 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e14.||Kämpfer N, Staufenbiel S, Wegener I, et al.: Suicidality in patients with somatoform disorder—the speechless expression of anger? Psychiatry Res 2016; 246: 485–91 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e15.||Lan CC, Tseng CH, Chen JH, et al.: Increased risk of a suicide event in patients with primary fibromyalgia and in fibromyalgia patients with concomitant comorbidities: a nationwide population-based cohort study. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016; 95: e5187 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e16.||Calati R, Laglaoui Bakhiyi C, Artero S, Ilgen M, Courtet P: The impact of physical pain on suicidal thoughts and behaviors: meta-analyses. J Psychiatr Res 2015; 71: 16–32 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e17.||Spiegel B, Schoenfeld P, Naliboff B: Systematic review: the prevalence of suicidal behaviour in patients with chronic abdominal pain and irritable bowel syndrome. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007; 26: 183–93 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e18.||Wessely S, Nimnuan C, Sharpe M: Functional somatic syndromes: one or many? Lancet 1999; 354: 936–9 CrossRef|
|e19.||Olde Hartman TC, Lucassen PL, van de Lisdonk EH, Bor HH, van Weel C: Chronic functional somatic symptoms: a single syndrome? Br J Gen Pract 2004; 54: 922–7.|
|e20.||Henningsen P, Zimmermann T, Sattel H: Medically unexplained physical symptoms, anxiety, and depression: a meta-analytic review. Psychosom Med 2003, 65, 528–33 CrossRef PubMed Central|
|e21.||Fink P, Toft T, Hansen MS, Ørnbøl E, Olesen F: Symptoms and syndromes of bodily distress: an exploratory study of 978 internal medical, neurological, and primary care patients. Psychosom Med 2007; 69: 30–9 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e22.||Kanaan RA, Lepine JP, Wessely SC: The association or otherwise of the functional somatic syndromes. Psychosom Med 2007; 69: 855–9 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e23.||Riedl A, Schmidtmann M, Stengel A, et al.: Somatic comorbidities of irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic analysis. J Psychosom Res 2008; 64: 573–82 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e24.||Fink P, Schröder A: One single diagnosis, bodily distress syndrome, succeeded to capture 10 diagnostic categories of functional somatic syndromes and somatoform disorders. J Psychosom Res 2010; 68: 415–26 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e25.||Lieb R, Meinlschmidt G, Araya R: Epidemiology of the association between somatoform disorders and anxiety and depressive disorders: an update. Psychosom Med 2007; 69: 860–3 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e26.||Lowe B, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Mussell M, Schellberg D, Kroenke K: Depression, anxiety and somatization in primary care: syndrome overlap and functional impairment. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2008; 30: 191–9 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e27.||Hanel G, Henningsen P, Herzog W, et al.: Depression, anxiety, and somatoform disorders: vague or distinct categories in primary care? Results from a large cross-sectional study. J Psychosom Res 2009; 67: 189–97 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e28.||Kohlmann S, Gierk B, Hilbert A, Brahler E, Lowe B: The overlap of somatic, anxious and depressive syndromes: a population-based analysis. J Psychosom Res 2016; 90: 51–6 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e29.||Hatcher S, Gilmore K, Pinchen K: A follow-up study of patients with medically unexplained symptoms referred to a liaison psychiatry service. Int J Psychiatry Med 2011; 41: 217–27 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e30.||Stone J, Carson A, Duncan R, et al.: Symptoms unexplained by organic disease in 1144 new neurology out-patients: how often does the diagnosis change at follow-up? Brain 2009; 132: 2878–88 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e31.||Eikelboom EM, Tak LM, Roest AM, Rosmalen JGM: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the percentage of revised diagnoses in functional somatic symptoms. J Psychosom Res 2016; 88: 60–7 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e32.||Konnopka A, Schaefert R, Heinrich S, et al.: Economics of medically unexplained symptoms: a systematic review of the literature. Psychother Psychosom 2012; 81: 265–75 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e33.||Rask MT, Ørnbøl E, Rosendal M, Fink P: Long-term outcome of bodily distress syndrome in primary care: a follow-up study on health care costs, work disability, and self-rated health. Psychosom Med 2017; 79: 345–57 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e34.||Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (2009) Levels of evidence. www.cebm.net/2009/06/oxford-centre-evidence-based-medicine-levels-evidence-march-2009/ (last accessed on 10 August 2018).|
|e35.||Puhan MA, Schünemann HJ, Murad MH, et al.: A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis. BMJ 2014; 349: g5630 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e36.||Beauchamp TL, Childress JF: Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2013.|
|e37.||Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e. V. (AWMF): AWMF-Regelwerk Leitlinien. www.awmf.org/leitlinien/awmf-regelwerk.html (last accessed on 31 August 2018).|
|e38.||Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e. V. (AWMF), Ärztliches Zentrum für Qualität in der Medizin (ÄZQ), eds: Deutsches Instrument zur methodischen Leitlinien-Bewertung (DELBI) – Fassung 2005/2006 + Domäne 8. www.leitlinien.de/mdb/edocs/pdf/literatur/delbi-fassung-2005-2006-domaene-8-2008.pdf (last accessed on 10 August 2018).|
|e39.||Berens S, Hausteiner-Wiehle C, Sattel H, et al.: Schweregrad-gestuftes, kooperatives und koordiniertes Versorgungsmodell für Patienten mit nicht-spezifischen, funktionellen und somatoformen Körperbeschwerden. Psychologische Medizin: Österreichische Fachzeitschrift für medizinische Psychologie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie 2016; 4: 13–22.|
|e40.||Almquist E, Toernblom H, Simreìn M: Practical management of irritable bowel syndrome: a clinical review. Minerva gastroenterologica e dietologica 2016; 62: 30–48.|
|e41.||van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, Hoedeman R, Keuter EJ, Swinkels JA: Presentation of the multidisciplinary guideline Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms (MUPS) and somatoform disorder in the Netherlands: disease management according to risk profiles. J Psychosom Res 2012; 72: 168–9 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e42.||Salmon P, Peters S, Stanley I: Patients‘ perceptions of medical explanations for somatisation disorders: qualitative analysis. BMJ 1999; 318: 372–6 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e43.||Arbeitskreis PISO (Hrsg.): Psychodynamisch-Interpersonelle Therapie bei somatoformen Störungen (PISO). Eine manualisierte Kurzzeitintervention. Göttingen: Hogrefe Verlag 2012; 47ff.|
|e44.||Schaefert R, Bölter R, Faber R, Claudia Kaufmann C: Tangential, nicht frontal. Annäherung an eine schwierige Patientengruppe. Psychotherapie im Dialog 2008; 9: 252–9 CrossRef|
|e45.||Rask MT, Carlsen AH, Budtz-Lilly A, Rosendal M: Multiple somatic symptoms in primary care patients: a cross-sectional study of consultation content, clinical management strategy and burden of encounter. BMC Fam Pract 2016; 17: 100 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e46.||Olde Hartman TC, Woutersen-Koch H, van der Horst HE: Medically unexplained symptoms: evidence, guidelines, and beyond. Br J Gen Pract 2013; 63: 625–6 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e47.||Brownell AK, Atkins C, Whiteley A, Woollard RF, Kornelsen J: Clinical practitioners‘ views on the management of patients with Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms (MUPS): a qualitative study. BMJ Open 2016; 6: e012379 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e48.||Murray AM, Toussaint A, Althaus A, Lowe B: The challenge of diagnosing non-specific, functional, and somatoform disorders: a systematic review of barriers to diagnosis in primary care. J Psychosom Res 2016; 80: 1–10 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e49.||Deyo RA, Rainville J, Kent DL: What can the history and physical examination tell us about low back pain? JAMA 1992; 268: 760–5 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e50.||Pryor DB, Shaw L, McCants CB, et al.: Value of the history and physical in identifying patients at increased risk for coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118: 81–90 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e51.||Kroenke K: A practical and evidence-based approach to common symptoms: a narrative review. Ann Intern Med 2014; 161: 579–86 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e52.||Evens A, Vendetta L, Krebs K, Herath P: Medically unexplained neurologic symptoms: a primer for physicians who make the initial encounter. Am J Med 2015; 128: 1059–64 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e53.||Kelly M, Tink W, Nixon L, Dornan T: Losing touch? Refining the role of physical examination in family medicine. Can Fam Physician 2015; 61: 1041–3.|
|e54.||Pincus T, Holt N, Vogel S, et al.: Cognitive and affective reassurance and patient outcomes in primary care: a systematic review. Pain 2013; 154: 2407–16 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e55.||Mann B, Wilson H: Diagnosing somatisation in adults in the first consultation: moving beyond diagnosis by exclusion. Br J Gen Pract 2013; 63: 607–8 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e56.||Lorenzer A: Interaktion, Sprache und szenisches Verstehen. Psyche 1983: 37; 97–115.|
|e57.||Riess H, Kraft-Todd G: E.M.P.A.T.H.Y.: a tool to enhance nonverbal communication between clinicians and their patients. Acad Med 2014; 89: 1108–12 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e58.||Axt-Adam P, van der Wouden JC, van der Does E: Influencing behavior of physicians ordering laboratory tests: a literature study. Med Care 1993; 31: 784–94 CrossRef|
|e59.||van Wijk MA, van der Lei J, Mosseveld M, Bohnen AM, van Bemmel JH: Assessment of decision support for blood test ordering in primary care. a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134: 274–81 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e60.||Koch H, van Bokhoven MA, ter Riet G, et al.: Ordering blood tests for patients with unexplained fatigue in general practice: what does it yield? Results of the VAMPIRE trial. Br J Gen Pract 2009; 59: e93–100 CrossRef PubMed Central|
|e61.||Epstein RM, Hadee T, Carroll J, Meldrum SC, Lardner J, Shields CG: “Could this be something serious?” Reassurance, uncertainty, and empathy in response to patients’ expressions of worry. J Gen Intern Med 2007; 22: 1731–9 MEDLINE|
|e62.||Anderson M, Hartz A, Nordin T, et al.: Community physicians‘ strategies for patients with medically unexplained symptoms. Fam Med 2008; 40: 111–8.|
|e63.||Giroldi E, Veldhuijzen W, Leijten C, et al.: ‚No need to worry‘: an exploration of general practitioners‘ reassuring strategies. BMC Fam Pract 2014; 15: 133 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e64.||Hasenbring MI, Pincus T: Effective reassurance in primary care of low back pain: what messages from clinicians are most beneficial at early stages? Clin J Pain 2015; 31: 133–6 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e65.||Musekamp G, Gerlich C, Ehlebracht-König I, Faller H, Reusch A: Evaluation of a self-management patient education program for patients with fibromyalgia syndrome: study protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2016; 17: 55 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e66.||Smith RC, Lyles JS, Gardiner JC, et al.: Primary care clinicians treat patients with medically unexplained symptoms: a randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med 2006; 21: 671–7 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e67.||Smith RC, Gardiner JC, Luo Z, Schooley S, Lamerato L, Rost K: Primary care physicians treat somatization. J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24: 829–32 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e68.||Aiarzaguena JM, Grandes G, Gaminde I, Salazar A, Sanchez A, Arino J: A randomized controlled clinical trial of a psychosocial and communication intervention carried out by GPs for patients with medically unexplained symptoms. Psychol Med 2007; 37: 283–94 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e69.||Pols RG, Battersby MW: Coordinated care in the management of patients with unexplained physical symptoms: depression is a key issue. Med J Aust 2008; 188(12 Suppl): 133–7.|
|e70.||van der Weijden T, van Velsen M, Dinant GJ, van Hasselt CM, Grol R: Unexplained complaints in general practice: prevalence, patients‘ expectations, and professionals‘ test-ordering behavior. Med Decis Making 2003; 23: 226–31 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e71.||Heijmans M, Olde Hartman TC, van Weel-Baumgarten E, Dowrick C, Lucassen PL, van Weel C: Experts‘ opinions on the management of medically unexplained symptoms in primary care. A qualitative analysis of narrative reviews and scientific editorials. Fam Pract 2011; 28: 444–55 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e72.||Fink P, Rosendal M, Toft T: Assessment and treatment of functional disorders in general practice: the extended reattribution and management model—an advanced educational program for nonpsychiatric doctors. Psychosomatics 2002; 43: 93–131 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e73.||Larisch A, Schweickhardt A, Wirsching M, Fritzsche K: Psychosocial interventions for somatizing patients by the general practitioner: a randomized controlled trial. J Psychosom Res 2004; 57: 507–14 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e74.||Rief W, Martin A, Rauh E, Zech T, Bender A: Evaluation of general practitioners‘ training: how to manage patients with unexplained physical symptoms. Psychosomatics 2006; 47: 304–11 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e75.||Rosendal M, Olesen F, Fink P, Toft T, Sokolowski I, Bro F: A randomized controlled trial of brief training in the assessment and treatment of somatization in primary care: effects on patient outcome. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2007; 29: 364–73 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e76.||Smith RC, Gardiner JC, Luo Z, Schooley S, Lamerato L, Rost K: Primary care physicians treat somatization. J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24: 829–32 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e77.||Weiland A, Blankenstein AH, van Saase JL, et al.: Training medical specialists to communicate better with patients with Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms (MUPS). A randomized, controlled trial. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0138342 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e78.||Warner A, Walters K, Lamahewa K, Buszewicz M: How do hospital doctors manage patients with medically unexplained symptoms: a qualitative study of physicians. J R Soc Med 2017; 110: 65–72 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e79.||Yon K, Habermann S, Rosenthal J, et al.: Improving teaching about medically unexplained symptoms for newly qualified doctors in the UK: findings from a questionnaire survey and expert workshop. BMJ Open 2017; 7: e014720 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e80.||Schaefert R, Benedikt G, Sauer N, et al.: Früherkennung und Behandlung funktioneller/somatoformer Beschwerden in der Allgemeinarztpraxis – das FUNKTIONAL-Forschungsprojekt. Notfall & Hausarztmedizin 2005; 31: 527–36 CrossRef|
|e81.||Rudolf G, Henningsen P: Die psychotherapeutische Behandlung somatoformer Störungen. Z Psychsom Med Psychother 2003; 49: 3–19 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e82.||Langewitz W: Patientenzentrierte Kommunikation. In: Adler RH, Herzog W, Joraschky P, et al.: Psychosomatische Medizin. Theoretische Modelle und klinische Praxis. München: Elsevier, Urban & Fischer 2011: 338–47.|
|e83.||Rolfe A, Burton C: Reassurance after diagnostic testing with a low pretest probability of serious disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med 2013; 173: 407–16 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e84.||Kroenke K: Diagnostic testing and the illusory reassurance of normal results: comment on „Reassurance after diagnostic testing with a low pretest probability of serious disease“. JAMA Intern Med 2013; 173: 416–7 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e85.||Petrie KJ, Sherriff R: Normal diagnostic test results do not reassure patients. Evid Based Med 2014; 19: 14 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e86.||Widder B, Dertwinkel R, Egle UT, Foerster K, Schiltenwolf M: Leitlinie für die Begutachtung von Schmerzen. Psychotherapeut 2007; 52: 334–46 CrossRef|
|e87.||Burton C, Lucassen P, Aamland A, Olde Hartman T: Explaining symptoms after negative tests: towards a rational explanation. J R Soc Med 2015; 108: 84–8 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e88.||Vedsted P, Christensen MB, Sørensen HT, Fink P, Olesen F: Special status consultation for frequent attenders. Who are the candidates? J Public Health Med 2002; 24: 53–7 CrossRef|
|e89.||Fink P, Rosendal M, Toft T: Assessment and treatment of functional disorders in general practice: the extended reattribution and management model—an advanced educational program for nonpsychiatric doctors. Psychosomatics 2002; 43: 93–131 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e90.||Bahrs O: Der Bilanzierungsdialog. Der Mensch 2007; 38: 29–32.|
|e91.||Stephens G, Derry S, Moore RA: Paracetamol (acetaminophen) for acute treatment of episodic tension-type headache in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; (6): CD011889 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e92.||Derry S, Wiffen PJ, Häuser W, et al.: Oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for fibromyalgia in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 3: CD012332 CrossRef PubMed Central|
|e93.||Soares A, Andriolo RB, Atallah AN, da Silva EM: Botulinum toxin for myofascial pain syndromes in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; (7): CD007533 CrossRef|
|e94.||Kleinstäuber M, Witthöft M, Steffanowski A, van Marwijk H, Hiller W, Lambert MJ: Pharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; (11): CD010628 CrossRef|
|e95.||Walitt B, Klose P, Üçeyler N, Phillips T, Häuser W: Antipsychotics for fibromyalgia in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; (6): CD011804 CrossRef PubMed Central|
|e96.||Ford AC, Luthra P, Tack J, Boeckxstaens GE, Moayyedi P, Talley NJ: Efficacy of psychotropic drugs in functional dyspepsia: systematic review and meta-analysis. Gut 2017; 66: 411–20 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e97.||Moayyedi P, Quigley EM, Lacy BE, et al.: The effect of fiber supplementation on irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2014; 109: 1367 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e98.||Tiequn B, Guanqun C, Shuo Z: Therapeutic effects of lactobacillus in treating irritable bowel syndrome: a meta-analysis. Intern Med 2015; 54: 243–9 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e99.||Furlan AD, Giraldo M, Baskwill A, Irvin E, Imamura M: Massage for low-back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; (9): CD001929 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e100.||Naumann J, Sadaghiani C: Therapeutic benefit of balneotherapy and hydrotherapy in the management of fibromyalgia syndrome: a qualitative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arthritis Res Ther 2014; 16: R141 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central|
|e101.||Salazar AP, Stein C, Marchese RR, Plentz RD, Pagnussat AS: Electric stimulation for pain relief in patients with fibromyalgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Pain Physician 2017; 20: 15–25.|
|e102.||Müller A, Franke H, Resch KL, Fryer G: Effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative therapy for managing symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2014; 114: 470–9 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e103.||Martins WR, Blasczyk JC, Aparecida Furlan de Oliveira M, Lagoa Goncalves KF, Bonini-Rocha AC, Dugailly PM: Efficacy of musculoskeletal manual approach in the treatment of temporomandibular joint disorder: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Man Ther 2016; 21: 10–7 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e104.||Mesa-Jiménez JA, Lozano-López C, Angulo-Díaz-Parreño S, Rodríguez-Fernández ÁL, De-la-Hoz-Aizpurua JL, Fernández-de-Las-Peñas C: Multimodal manual therapy vs. pharmacological care for management of tension type headache: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Cephalalgia 2015; 35: 1323–32 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e105.||Lam M, Galvin R, Curry P: Effectiveness of acupuncture for nonspecificchronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa1976) 2013; 38: 2124–38 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e106.||Ainpradub K, Sitthipornvorakul E, Janwantanakul P, van der Beek AJ: Effect of education on non-specific neck and low back pain: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Man Ther 2016; 22: 31–41 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e107.||Anheyer D, Haller H, Barth J, Lauche R, Dobos G, Cramer H: Mindfulness-based stress reduction for treating low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2017; 166: 799–807 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e108.||Searle A, Spink M, Ho A, Chuter V: Exercise interventions for the treatment of chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Clin Rehabil 2015; 29: 1155–67 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e109.||Kamper SJ, Apeldoorn AT, Chiarotto A, et al.: Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; (9): CD000963 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e110.||Waterschoot FP, Dijkstra PU, Hollak N, de Vries HJ, Geertzen JH, Reneman MF: Dose or content? Effectiveness of pain rehabilitation programs for patients with chronic low back pain: a systematic review. Pain 2014; 155: 179–89 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e111.||van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, van Os TW, van Marwijk HW, Leentjens AF: Effect of psychiatric consultation models in primary care. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Psychosom Res 2010; 68: 521–33 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e112.||Hoedeman R, Blankenstein AH, van der Feltz‐Cornelis CM, Krol B, Stewart R, Groothoff JW: Consultation letters for medically unexplained physical symptoms in primary care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; (12): CD006524 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e113.||Koelen JA, Houtveen JH, Abbass A, et al.: Effectiveness of psychotherapy for severe somatoform disorder: meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry 2014; 204: 12–9 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e114.||Zech N, Hansen E, Bernardy K, Häuser W: Efficacy, acceptability and safety of guided imagery/hypnosis in fibromyalgia—a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Pain 2017; 21: 217–27 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e115.||van den Bergh O, Witthöft M, Petersen S, Brown RJ: Symptoms and the body: taking the inferential leap. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2017; 74(Pt A): 185–203 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e116.||Varinen A, Kosunen E, Mattila K, Koskela T, Sumanen M: The relationship between childhood adversities and fibromyalgia in the general population. J Psychosom Res 2017; 99: 137–42 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e117.||Guthrie E: Adaptation of the psychodynamic-interpersonal model to work with medically unexplained symptoms. In: Barkham M, Guthrie E, Hardy GE, Margison F, eds.: Psychodynamic interpersonal therapy: a conversational model. London: Sage 2017.|
|e118.||Probst T, von Heymann F, Zaudig M, et al.: Effektivität stationärer psychosomatischer Krankenhausbehandlung – Ergebnisse einer multizentrischen Katamnesestudie. Z Psychosom Med Psychother 2009; 55: 409–20 CrossRef MEDLINE|
|e119.||Beutel ME, von Heymann F, Bleichner F, Tritt K, Hardt J: Wie wirksam ist psychosomatische Therapie bei somatoformen Störungen? Ergebnisse einer Multicenterstudie. Z Psychosom Med Psychother 2014; 60: 17–24 CrossRef MEDLINE|