Three BMJ letters published in response to Somatic Symptom Disorder commentary

Three letters are published this week in response to Allen Frances’ BMJ commentary on ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’

Post #237 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2No

On March 19, BMJ published a commentary by Allen Frances, MD, with contribution from Suzy Chapman, in both the print and online editions, strongly opposing the inclusion of ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ in the forthcoming DSM-5:

PERSONAL VIEW
The new somatic symptom disorder in DSM-5 risks mislabeling many people as mentally ill
This new condition suggested in the bible of mental health diagnoses lacks specificity, says Allen Frances

The opinion piece was also featured as US Editor’s Choice:

DSM-5 and the rough ride from approval to publication
Edward Davies, US news and features editor, BMJ

BMJ press released the commentary which was picked up by a number of international media sites including UK Times and Deborah Brauser for Medscape Medical News. To date, 31 Rapid Responses have been received.

Three letters (all US respondents) are printed in this week’s BMJ print edition (20 April 2013 Vol 346, Issue 7904). The letters are behind a paywall so I am giving links to the original BMJ Rapid Responses, with the caveat that responses may have been edited for the print edition:

+++
LETTERS
New somatic symptom disorder in DSM-5

Helping to find the most accurate diagnosis

BMJ 2013; 346 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f2228 (Published 16 April 2013) BMJ 2013;346:f2228
Joel E Dimsdale, professor of psychiatry emeritus, Michael Sharpe, professor of psychiatry, Francis Creed, professor of psychiatry, DSM-5 Somatic Symptom Disorders work group  BMJ Rapid Response 20 March 2013

+++
Guilty of diagnostic expansion

BMJ 2013; 346 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f2254 (Published 16 April 2013) BMJ 2013;346:f2254
James Phillips, psychiatrist, USA  BMJ Rapid Response 25 March 2013

+++
A step in the wrong direction

BMJ 2013; 346 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f2233 (Published 16 April 2013) BMJ 2013;346:f2233
Steven A King, chair, DSM-IV and DSM-IV-TR pain disorders committees; Pain Management and Psychiatry, New York  BMJ Rapid Response 28 March 2013

+++
Further reading:

Somatic Symptom Disorder could capture millions more under mental health diagnosis Suzy Chapman, May 26, 2012
Mislabeling Medical Illness As Mental Disorder Allen Frances, MD, Psychology Today, DSM 5 in Distress, December 8, 2012
Why Did DSM 5 Botch Somatic Symptom Disorder? Allen Frances, MD, Psychology Today, Saving Normal, February 6, 2013
New Psych Disorder Could Mislabel Sick as Mentally Ill Susan Donaldson James, ABC News, February 27, 2013
Dimsdale JE. Medically unexplained symptoms: a treacherous foundation for somatoform disorders? Psychiatr Clin North Am 2011;34:511-3. [PMID: 21889675]

+++
American Psychiatric Association justifications for SSD:

APA Somatic Symptom Disorder Fact Sheet 
Somatic Chapter Drops Centrality Of Unexplained Medical Symptoms Psychiatric News, Mark Moran, March 1, 2013
Somatic Symptoms Criteria in DSM-5 Improve Diagnosis, Care David J Kupfer, MD, Chair, DSM-5 Task Force, defends the SSD construct, Huffington Post, February 8, 2013

‘Somatic Symptom Disorders in DSM-5: A step forward or a fall back?’ Eleanor Stein MD FRCP(C)

‘Somatic Symptom Disorders in DSM-5: A step forward or a fall back?’ Eleanor Stein MD FRCP(C) slide presentation

Post #233 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2Jt

Eleanor Stein MD FRCP(C) is a psychiatrist in private practice and a Clinical Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychiatry, University of Calgary, Canada.

In March, Dr Stein gave a presentation on the new Somatic Symptom Disorder category (as it had stood at the third draft) to the Alberta Psychiatric Association and has very kindly made her presentation slides available. These are in PDF format so no PowerPoint viewer is required.

Somatic Symptom Disorders in DSM-5 A step forward or a fall back?

Alberta Psychiatric Association March 23, 2013

 Click link for PDF document   SSD Stein Presentation March 2013

The American Psychiatric Association is not affiliated with nor endorses this presentation.

The next edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders unwraps next month; finalized criteria sets are embargoed until May 22.

Until then, you will have to make do with the DSM-5 Table of Contents and Highlights of Changes from DSM-IV-TR to DSM-5 and the fact sheets and justifications on this APA webpage.

Erasing the interface between psychiatry and general medicine?

It’s four years, now, since I first started reporting on the deliberations of the Somatic Symptom Disorders Work Group.

The Somatoform Disorders section of DSM-IV has been dismantled and four rarely used disorders replaced for DSM-5 by a single new diagnosis, ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ (SSD).

From May, everyone with chronic medical illness or long-term pain becomes a potential candidate for this new mental disorder label.

Out go DSM-IV’s rigorous criteria sets and the requirement for multiple symptoms to be medically unexplained; in comes a far looser definition that doesn’t distinguish between ‘medically unexplained’ somatic symptoms or symptoms in association with diagnosed medical disease.

You can read APA’s rationale for the change here and here and Task Force Chair, David J Kupfer, defending the SSD work group’s decisions here, on Huffington Post.

For DSM-5, the SSD criteria set focuses on the psychological impact of persistent, distressing bodily symptoms on the patient’s thoughts, feelings and behaviours and the degree to which their response is perceived to be ‘disproportionate’ or ‘excessive’ – irrespective of symptom etiology.

Patients with common diseases like cancer, angina, diabetes, CVD, or multiple sclerosis; with long-term pain; with chronic illnesses and conditions like irritable bowel syndrome, fibromyalgia, CFS, interstitial cystitis, chronic Lyme disease, or persistent, somatic symptoms of unclear etiology may qualify for an additional mental disorder diagnosis if the clinician considers the patient also meets the criteria for ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ and may benefit from treatment  – psychotropic drugs, CBT or other therapies to modify ‘faulty illness beliefs’ and ‘maladaptive’ coping strategies.

“[The SSD Work Group's] framework will allow a diagnosis of somatic symptom disorder in addition to a general medical condition*, whether the latter is a well-recognized organic disease or a functional somatic syndrome such as irritable bowel syndrome or chronic fatigue syndrome” [1]

“These disorders typically present first in non-psychiatric settings and somatic symptom disorders can accompany diverse general medical as well as psychiatric diagnoses. Having somatic symptoms of unclear etiology is not in itself sufficient to make this diagnosis. Some patients, for instance with irritable bowel syndrome or fibromyalgia would not necessarily qualify for a somatic symptom disorder diagnosis. Conversely, having somatic symptoms of an established disorder (e.g. diabetes) does not exclude these diagnoses if the criteria are otherwise met.

“The symptoms may or may not be associated with a known medical condition. Symptoms may be specific (such as localized pain) or relatively non-specific (e.g. fatigue). The symptoms sometimes represent normal bodily sensations (e.g., orthostatic dizziness), or discomfort that does not generally signify serious disease.” [2]

*According to page 1 of APA document Highlights of Changes from DSM-IV-TR to DSM-5, under the heading “Terminology,” the document states: ‘The phrase “general medical condition” is replaced in DSM-5 with “another medical condition” where relevant across all disorders.’ Without better context for this change of terminology, it’s not clear what the implications might be or whether this might represent evidence of intent to blur the boundary between psychiatric and general medical conditions, or the colonization of general medicine. (If any readers are aware of earlier references to this change of terminology for DSM-5 and/or APA’s rationale, I should be pleased to receive information, as I can find no reference prior to January 21.)

Psychiatric creep

This new category will potentially result in a ‘bolt-on’ mental disorder diagnosis being applied to all chronic illnesses and medical conditions if the clinician decides the patient’s response to distressing bodily symptoms is ‘excessive’ or their coping strategies are ‘maladaptive,’ or that the patient is ‘catastrophising,’ or displaying ‘fear avoidance’ or is overly preoccupied with their symptoms (or in the case of a parent, a child’s symptoms).

If the practitioner feels the patient is spending too much time on the internet researching data, symptoms and treatments, or that their lives have become dominated by ‘illness worries,’ they may be vulnerable to dual-diagnosis with a mental disorder.

Patients with chronic, multiple bodily symptoms due to rare conditions or multi-system diseases like Behçet’s syndrome or Systemic lupus, which may take several years to diagnose, may be vulnerable to misdiagnosis with a mental disorder and premature case closure.

Families caring for children with chronic illness may be placed at risk of wrongful accusation of ‘over-involvement’ or of being ‘excessively concerned’ with a child’s symptoms or of colluding in the maintenance of ‘sick role behaviour.’

Just one distressing symptom for at least six months duration plus one of the three ‘B type’ criteria is all that is required to tick the box for a diagnosis of a mental health disorder – cancer + SSD; angina + SSD; asthma + SSD; COPD + SSD; diabetes + SSD; IBS + SSD; CFS + SSD…

15% of the ‘diagnosed illness’ study group (cancer and coronary disease) met the criteria for an additional diagnosis of SSD in the DSM-5 field trials.

In the ‘functional somatic’ study group (irritable bowel syndrome or chronic widespread pain), 26% were coded with SSD.

The criteria, as they stood at the third draft, caught 7% of the ‘healthy’ field trial control group.

The Somatic Symptom Disorder construct represents a significant change to the current DSM-IV-TR categories.

There is no substantial body of evidence to support the validity, reliability and safety of the application of SSD in adults or children nor any published data on projected prevalence rates across the entire disease spectrum or on the potential clinical and economic burdens for providers and payers – yet the SSD Work Group, Task Force and APA Board of Trustees have barrelled this through.

In February, SSD Work Group Chair, Joel E Dimsdale, MD, told journalist, Susan Donaldson James, for ABC News:

 “…If it doesn’t work, we’ll fix it in the DSM-5.1 or DSM-6.”

APA says there will be opportunities to reassess and revise DSM-5′s new disorders, post publication, and that it intends to start work on a DSM-5.1 release. Advocates and patient groups are not reassured by APA’s ‘publish first – patch later’ approach: is this science or Windows 7?

This section of DSM-5, seemingly overlooked by clinicians in the field, both within and outside psychiatry and psychosomatics, and by medico-legal and disability specialists demands scrutiny and investigation.

The SSD construct is now influencing emerging proposals and field testing for three severities of a new category for ICD-11, Bodily Distress Disorder, proposed to replace half a dozen existing ICD-10 Somatoform Disorders [3] [4].

As Dr James Brennan wrote in a recent BMJ Rapid Response:

“…All human distress occurs within the context of complicated factors (biological, psychological, emotional, interpersonal, social etc) and it is this context that demands our assessment and understanding, not reducing it all to a subjective judgment by a clinician as to whether a particular emotion is ‘excessive’ or ‘disproportionate’. How much distress ought a cancer patient to have? What democratic authority gives any of us the right to say what is excessive or proportionate about another person’s thoughts, emotions and behaviour? The SSD criteria in this regard are dangerously loose and over-inclusive.”

References

1 Dimsdale J, Creed F. DSM-V Workgroup on Somatic Symptom Disorders: the proposed diagnosis of somatic symptom disorders in DSM-V to replace somatoform disorders in DSM-IV – a preliminary report. J Psychosom Res 2009;66:473-6.
2 DSM-5 Somatic Symptom Disorders Work Group Disorder Descriptions PDF document, published May 4, 2011 for the second stakeholder review.
3 Creed F, Gureje O. Emerging themes in the revision of the classification of somatoform disorders. Int Rev Psychiatry 2012;24:556-67.
4 Goldberg DP. Comparison between ICD and DSM diagnostic systems for mental disorders. In: Sorel E, ed. 21st century global mental health. Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2012:37-53.

 

Further reading

APA Somatic Symptom Disorder Fact Sheet

Somatic Chapter Drops Centrality Of Unexplained Medical Symptoms Psychiatric News, Mark Moran, March 1, 2013

Somatic Symptoms Criteria in DSM-5 Improve Diagnosis, Care David J Kupfer, MD, Chair, DSM-5 Task Force, defends the SSD construct, Huffington Post, February 8, 2013

The new somatic symptom disorder in DSM-5 risks mislabeling many people as mentally ill Allen Frances, MD, BMJ 2013;346:f1580 BMJ Press Release

Somatic Symptom Disorder could capture millions more under mental health diagnosis Suzy Chapman, May 26, 2012

Mislabeling Medical Illness As Mental Disorder Allen Frances, MD, Psychology Today, DSM 5 in Distress, December 8, 2012

Why Did DSM 5 Botch Somatic Symptom Disorder? Allen Frances, MD, Psychology Today, Saving Normal, February 6, 2013

New Psych Disorder Could Mislabel Sick as Mentally Ill Susan Donaldson James, ABC News, February 27, 2013

Dimsdale JE. Medically unexplained symptoms: a treacherous foundation for somatoform disorders? Psychiatr Clin North Am 2011;34:511-3. [PMID: 21889675]

APA website: New documents and videos on ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder; article: Psychiatric News

APA website: New documents and videos on ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder; article: Psychiatric News

Post #228 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2Gi

Updates at March 7

Article in Die Psychiatrie

Somatic Symptom Disorders: a new approach in DSM-5

J. E. Dimsdale, University of California, San Diego, DSM Task force, Somatic Symptoms Work Group

Die Psychiatrie 2013; 10: 30–32

Summary

Following a brief historic discourse, problems with the current use and concepts the of somatoform disorders are described. The rationale for substituting the term “somatoform” with “somatic symptom” in DSM5 is explained and the new classification criteria for the group of “somatic symptom related disorders” are described, which include severity ratings.

A special aspect is that “Illness anxiety disorder” is introduced as a new diagnostic entity in DSM-5.

“Störung mit somatischen Symptomen”: ein neuer Ansatz in DSM-5

Zusammenfassung

Nach einem kurzen historischen Diskurs werden die Problembereiche und die Konzepte der somatoformen Störungen erläutert. Das Rational für einen Ersatz der “somatoformen” Störung durch eine “Störung mit somatischen Symptomen” in DSM5 wird erläutert. Die Klassifikationskriterien der Gruppe der “Störungen mit somatischen Symptomen” wird dargestellt.

Ein besonderer Aspekt ist die Einführung einer “Erkrankungsangst-Störung” in DSM-5.

Full paper can be downloaded here: http://bit.ly/W7filu

Doug Bremner, MD, comments on ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ here:

DSM-5 Somatic Symptoms Disorder is Going to Make Us All Mental

Doug Bremner | February 12, 2013

 

A number of new documents and short videos on ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ have been published on the APA’s new webpages, plus an article in Psychiatric News, published on March 1.

These are followed by recent, mainstream media coverage of concerns for all illness groups for the implications of misdiagnosis with ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ or for an additional diagnosis of ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder.’

http://www.psychiatry.org/practice/dsm/dsm5/dsm-5

Fact Sheet: Click link for PDF document   Somatic Symptom Disorder

Videos:

Joel E Dimsdale, Chair, DSM-5 Somatic Symptom Disorders Work Group

What is Somatic Symptom Disorder?

http://www.psychiatry.org/practice/dsm/dsm5/dsm-5-video-series-somatic-symptom-disorder

What was the rationale behind changes to Somatic Symptom Disorder?

http://www.psychiatry.org/practice/dsm/dsm5/dsm-5-video-series-changes-to-somatic-symptoms

Will Somatic Symptom Disorder result in the missing of other medical problems?

http://www.psychiatry.org/practice/dsm/dsm5/dsm-5-video-series-somatic-symptom-disorder-and-other-medical-problems

Article: Psychiatric News (organ of the APA):

http://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/newsArticle.aspx?articleid=1659603

Psychiatric News | March 01, 2013
Volume 48 Number 5 page 7-7
10.1176/appi.pn.2013.3a26
American Psychiatric Association
Professional News

Somatic Chapter Drops Centrality Of Unexplained Medical Symptoms

Mark Moran

“…But Joel Dimsdale, M.D., chair of the Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders Work Group, emphasized that the most important change overall in this set of disorders is removal of the centrality of medically unexplained symptoms. “That was a defining characteristic of these disorders in DSM-IV, but we believe it was unhelpful and promoted a mind-body dualism that is hard to justify,” he told Psychiatric News.

So, for instance, the diagnosis of somatization disorder in DSM-IV was based on a long and complex symptom count of medically unexplained symptoms. DSM-5 criteria eliminate that requirement and recognize that individuals who meet criteria for somatic symptom disorder—the new designation, marked by disproportionate thoughts, feelings, and behaviors related to somatic symptoms—may or may not have a medically diagnosed condition.

Hypochondriasis has been eliminated; most individuals who would previously have been diagnosed with hypochondriasis have significant somatic symptoms in addition to their high health anxiety and should receive a DSM-5 diagnosis of somatic symptom disorder. Those with high health anxiety without somatic symptoms should receive a diagnosis of illness anxiety disorder…

Read full article here

+++

Related material

Dimsdale JE. Medically Unexplained Symptoms: A Treacherous Foundation for Somatoform Disorders? Psychiatr Clin North Am, Volume 34, Issue 3, Pages 511-513 [PUBMED 21889675]

Overlapping Conditions Alliance (OCA)

“Members of the Overlapping Conditions Alliance (OCA) produced a white paper, Chronic Pain in Women: Neglect, Dismissal and Discrimination, to promote awareness and research of neglected and poorly understood chronic pain conditions that affect millions of American women. This report, which can be viewed and downloaded below, includes detailed policy recommendations to further these goals.” (Report 2010 and Report 2011)

http://www.endwomenspain.org/resources/policy-analysis-recommendations

+++

Recent mainstream media coverage of the SSD issue

ABC News Radio:
Guidelines for Diagnosing Psychiatric Disorder May Overlook Physical Illnesses

ABC News:
New Psych Disorder Could Mislabel Sick as Mentally Ill

Canada.com and syndicated to a number of other Canadian media sites:
New “catch all” psychiatric disorder could label people who worry about their health as mentally ill

Fox News Health:
Does somatic symptom disorder really exist?

DSM-5 Task Force Chair, David J Kupfer, MD, defends the SSD construct on Huffington Post (but provides no answers to my questions):

David J. Kupfer, M.D. Chair, DSM-5 Task Force

Somatic Symptoms Criteria in DSM-5 Improve Diagnosis, Care

ICD-11 Beta draft and Bodily Distress Disorders; Per Fink and Bodily Distress Syndrome: Parts One and Two

ICD-11 Beta draft and Bodily Distress Disorders; Per Fink and Bodily Distress Syndrome Parts One and Two

Post #222 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2Dz

Part One

On January 6, I posted a brief update on proposals for the revision of ICD-10′s Somatoform Disorders based on what can be seen in the public version of the ICD-11 Beta drafting platform and on a book chapter by Professor, Sir David Goldberg. [1]

Professor Goldberg chairs the working group for revision of the mental health chapter of ICD-1o-PHC, the abridged, primary care version of ICD-10.

For the revision of ICD-10′s Somatoform Disorders sections for ICD-11, a WHO Expert Working Group on Somatic Distress and Dissociative Disorders has been assembled.

Professor Francis Creed (also a member of the DSM-5 Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders Work Group) is a member of this WHO working group, which is chaired by Professor Oye Gureje.

An April 2011 announcement by Stony Brook Medical Center states that Dr Joan E. Broderick, PhD had been appointed to the WHO Expert Working Group on Somatic Distress and Dissociative Disorders and that the first meeting of the group (said to consist of 17 international behavioral health professionals) was expected to be held in June 2011, in Madrid.

WHO has not published a list of  members of this working group or any progress reports and the names and affiliations of the 14 other members are unknown, so I am unable to confirm whether Professor Per Fink is a member of the group, which reports to the International Advisory Group for the Revision of ICD-10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders.

ICD-11 and Bodily Distress Disorders

ICD-11 is currently scheduled for completion in 2015/16. When viewing the public version of the Beta drafting platform please bear in mind the ICD-11 Revision Caveats: that the Beta draft is a work in progress, updated daily, is incomplete, may contain errors and is subject to change; not all proposals may be approved by the ICD-11 Revision Steering Committee or WHO classification experts, or retained following analysis of ICD-11 and ICD-11-PHC field trials.

The Bodily Distress Disorders section of ICD-11 Beta draft Chapter 5 can be found here:
http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/http%3a%2f%2fwho.int%2ficd%23F45
http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en#/http%3a%2f%2fwho.int%2ficd%23F45

As the ICD-11 Beta drafting platform stands at the time of compiling this report, the existing ICD-10 Somatoform Disorders are proposed to be subsumed under or replaced by Bodily Distress Disorders, and Psychological and behavioural factors associated with disorders or diseases classified elsewhere.

The following proposed ICD-11 categories are listed as child categories under parent term, Bodily Distress Disorders, and Psychological and behavioural factors associated with disorders or diseases classified elsewhere:

EC5 Mild bodily distress disorder
EC6 Moderate bodily distress disorder
EC7 Severe bodily distress disorder
EC8 Psychological and behavioural factors associated with disorders or diseases classified elsewhere

No Definition or any other Content Model parameters have been populated for the proposed categories EC5, EC6 and EC7, which are new entities to ICD. (EC8 is a legacy category from ICD-10.)

From the information currently displaying in the Beta draft, it is not possible to determine:

• how ICD-11 proposes to define Bodily Distress Disorders;

• what diagnostic criteria are being proposed;

whether diagnostic criteria would be based on a requirement for excessive or disproportionate psychological and behavioral characteristics in response to distressing somatic symptoms, such as illness anxiety, symptom focusing, catastrophising, maladaptive coping strategies, avoidance behavior or misattribution; or based on somatic symptom counts, or specific symptom clusters, or number of bodily systems affected, or a combination of these;

how the three Severity Specifiers: Mild, Moderate and Severe would be categorized;

• how the three Severities would be assessed for within primary and secondary care;

whether ICD-11′s proposed Bodily Distress Disorder construct is intended to mirror or incorporate DSM-5′s Somatic Symptom Disorder (SSD) construct, in line with ICD-11/DSM-5 harmonization, or

whether it is intended to mirror or incorporate Per Fink’s Bodily Distress Syndrome (BDS) construct, or to combine elements from both;

whether the Bodily Distress Disorder construct is proposed only to be applied to patients with distressing ‘medically unexplained somatic symptoms’ (MUS), or the so-called ‘Functional somatic syndromes’ (FSS), if the patient is considered to also meet the BDD criteria, or

whether it is proposed to be inclusive of patients with distressing somatic symptoms in the presence of diagnosed illness and general medical conditions, if the patient is considered to also meet the criteria;

• whether the Bodily Distress Disorder construct is proposed to be inclusive of parents or caregivers perceived as encouraging maintenance of sick role behavior or over-involved.

whether the Bodily Distress Disorder construct is proposed to be inclusive of children;

whether it is proposed that all or selected of the following: Neurasthenia and Fatigue syndrome (F48.0), Chronic fatigue syndrome (indexed to G93.3 in ICD-10; classified in ICD-11 Beta draft as an ICD Title term in Chapter 6: Diseases of the nervous system), IBS (K58), and Fibromyalgia (M79.7) should be reclassified under Bodily Distress Disorders;

• whether the Bodily Distress Disorder construct is proposed to subsume ICD-10′s Hypochondriacal disorder with somatic symptoms or incorporate this entity under Illness Anxiety Disorder for ICD-11.

(For ICD-11, ICD-10′s Hypochondriacal disorder [F45.2] is currently proposed to be renamed to Illness Anxiety Disorder and located under ANXIETY AND FEAR-RELATED DISORDERS.)

 • what ICD-11 proposes to do with ICD-10′s Neurasthenia;

(ICD-10′s Chapter V Neurasthenia [F48.0] is no longer listed in the public version of the ICD-11 Beta draft. For ICD-11-PHC, the primary care version of ICD-11, the proposal is for the term Neurasthenia to be eliminated. Since terms used in ICD-11-PHC require corresponding terms in the main classification, the intention may be to eliminate Neurasthenia from the main version, or subsume under another term.) [2]

All that can be determined from the Beta draft is that these earlier ICD-11 Beta draft Somatoform Disorders categories appear proposed to be subsumed under or replaced with the new BDD categories, EC5, EC6 and EC7, set out above:

Somatization disorder [F45.0 in ICD-10]
Undifferentiated somatoform disorder [F45.1 in ICD-10]
Somatoform autonomic dysfunction [F45.3 in ICD-10]
Persistent somatoform pain disorder [F45.4 in ICD-10]
    > Persistent somatoform pain disorder
    > Chronic pain disorder with somatic and psychological factors [Not in ICD-10]
Other somatoform disorders [F45.8 in ICD-10]
Somatoform disorder, unspecified [F45.9 in ICD-10]

I have previously reported that for ICD-11-PHC, the proposal, last year, was for a new disorder section called Bodily distress disorders, under which would sit new category Bodily stress [sic] syndrome.

This category is proposed for the ICD-11 primary care version to include “milder somatic symptom disorders” as well as “DSM-5′s Complex somatic symptom disorder” and would replace ”medically unexplained somatic symptoms.” [2]

In a future post (Part Three of this report), I shall be discussing emerging proposals for the ICD-11 construct, Bodily Distress Disorders, which may serve to fill in some of the gaps.

In the meantime, since it is unclear whether and to what extent the ICD-11 Bodily Distress Disorders category is proposed to mirror or incorporate the Bodily Distress Syndrome construct developed by Per Fink et al, Aarhus, Denmark, I am providing some material on Bodily Distress Syndrome in Part Two

Slide presentation: Per Fink: Somatoform disorders – functional somatic syndromes – Bodily distress syndrome (EACLPP lecture, June 2012)

Slide presentation: Per Fink: Somatoform disorders – functional somatic syndromes – Bodily distress syndrome (EACLPP lecture, June 2012)

Post #197 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2pN 

Slide presentation: Per Fink: Somatoform disorders – functional somatic syndromes – Bodily distress syndrome (EACLPP lecture, June 2012)

23 slides in PDF format (i.e. no PowerPoint viewer required)

       EACLPP Per Fink Somatoform Disorders

Aarhus University Hospital

The Research Clinic for Functional Disorders and Psychosomatics

Somatoform disorders – functional somatic syndromes – Bodily distress syndrome.

Need for care and organisation of care in an international perspective – EACLPP Lecture

Prof. Per Fink

MD, Ph.D, Dr.Med.Sc.

www.functionaldisorders.dk

+++

June 2012 EACLPP Annual Conference*

*The European Association of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry and Psychosomatics (EACLPP) and the European Network of Psychosomatic Medicine (ECPR) have recently merged the two associations to create a new society – the European Association of Psychosomatic Medicine (EAPM).

The Annual Scientific Meeting of the European Association for Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry and Psychosomatics (EACLPP) and the European Conference on Psychosomatic Research (ECPR) was entitled

“Towards a New Agenda: Cross-disciplinary Approach to Psychosomatic Medicine”

The conference was held in the city of Aarhus, Denmark, on 27 – 30 June 2012.

For last year’s conference, a report was published. I will post any report coming out of this year’s conference.

A Conference Abstract document be accessed here:

http://www.eaclpp-ecpr2012.dk/Home/DownloadOral

Selected Extracts:

Page 61 Nagel A

Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf & Schön Klinik Hamburg-Eilbek, Germany, Voigt K Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg- Eppendorf & Schön Klinik Hamburg-Eilbek, Germany

Diagnostic validity of Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder: Which combination of psychological criteria is best suited for DSM-5?

Page 17 Budtz-Lilly A

The Research Unit for General Practice, School of Public Health, Aarhus University, Denmark

Bodily Distress Syndrome: A new diagnosis for functional disorders in primary care

Page 19 Escobar J

Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA

An Update on DSM-5

Page 32 Fjorback L

Aarhus University Hospital, Research Clinic for Functional Disorders and Psychosomatics

Mindfulness Therapy for Bodily Distress Syndrome – randomized trial, one-year follow-up, active control

+++

Notes on Fink et al and Bodily Distress Syndrome (BDS)

According to Fink and colleagues, Bodily Distress Syndrome is a unifying diagnosis that encompasses somatization disorder, so-called “medically unexplained symptoms” (MUS), fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome and chronic fatigue syndrome and some other conditions which they consider to be closely related, with a likely shared underlying aetiology.

See paper: 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 May;68(5):415-26.

See article: Per Fink,a Marianne Rosendal b Understanding and Management of Functional Somatic Symptoms in Primary Care: The Concept of Functional Somatic Symptoms

aResearch Clinic for Functional Disorders and Psychosomatics, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark
bResearch Unit for General Practice, University of Aarhus, Denmark

See Per Fink’s clinical trial for BDS: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01518647

See BDS clinician/patient manual: Specialised Treatment for Severe Bodily Distress Syndromes (STreSS)

According to a June 2012 EACLPP Conference Abstract, the concept of Bodily Distress Syndrome (BDS) “is expected to be integrated into the upcoming versions of classification systems.”

The potential for inclusion of Bodily Distress Disorder/Syndrome within ICD-11 could have significant implications for patients, globally, who are diagnosed with one of the so-called “functional somatic syndromes.” These proposals require very close monitoring by patient organizations in those countries that will be implementing ICD-11, post 2015.

Research and clinical professionals, patient organizations and their professional advisors can register now with ICD Revision for input into the ongoing drafting process and urge organizations and professionals to engage in this process.

Abstracts, oral presentations, EACLPP Conference: 27 – 30 June 2012, Aarhus University Campus, Aarhus – Denmark

http://www.eaclpp-ecpr2012.dk/Home/DownloadOral

Extracts

Page 17 Budtz-Lilly A

The Research Unit for General Practice, School of Public Health, Aarhus University, Denmark

Bodily Distress Syndrome: A new diagnosis for functional disorders in primary care

Aim: Medically unexplained or functional symptoms and disorders are common in primary care. Empirical research has proposed specific criteria for a new unifying diagnosis for functional disorders and syndromes: Bodily Distress Syndrome (BDS). This new concept is expected to be integrated into the upcoming versions of classification systems.

And from Page 31 of the Conference Abstracts:

Fjorback L

Aarhus University Hospital, Research Clinic for Functional Disorders and Psychosomatics

Mindfulness Therapy for Bodily Distress Syndrome – randomized trial, one-year follow-up, active control

Objective: To conduct a feasibility and efficacy trial of mindfulness therapy in somatization disorder and functional somatic syndromes such as fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, and chronic fatigue syndrome, defined as bodily distress syndrome (BDS)…

+++

References and related material:

1] Patients with medically unexplained symptoms and somatisation - a challenge for European health care systems: A white paper of the EACLPP Medically Unexplained Symptoms study group by Peter Henningsen and Francis Creed: http://www.eaclpp.org/working_groups.html
http://www.eaclpp.org/documents/Patientswithmedicallyunexplainedsymptomsandsomatisation_000.doc

2] Creed F, Guthrie E, Fink P, Henningsen P, Rief W, Sharpe M and White. Is there a better term than “Medically unexplained symptoms”? J Psychosom Res: Volume 68, Issue 1, Pages 5-8 January 2010) discusses the deliberations of the EACLPP MUS study group. Editorial also includes references to the DSM and ICD revision processes: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20004295

3] 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 May;68(5):415-26. The Research Clinic for Functional Disorders and Psychosomatics, Aarhus University Hospital, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20403500

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 Jan;69(1):30-9.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17244846
Full text: http://www.psychosomaticmedicine.org/content/69/1/30.full

Fink P, Rosendal, M. Recent developments in the understanding and management of functional somatic symptoms in primary care. Current Opinion in Psychiatry 2008, 21:182–188

Rosendal M, Fink P, Falkoe E, Schou Hansen H, Olesen F. Improving the Classification of Medically Unexplained Symptoms in Primary Care. Eur. J. Psychiat. v.21 n.1 Zaragoza ene.-mar. 2007
Text: http://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0213-61632007000100004
PDF: http://scielo.isciii.es/pdf/ejpen/v21n1/improv3.pdf

4] EURASMUS  http://eurasmus.net/
The multidisciplinary European Research Association for Somatisation and Medically Unexplained Symptoms(EURASMUS) was formed to study the genetic, psychological and physiological mechanisms underlying bodily distress. Co-convenors: Francis Creed, Peter Henningsen

5] Notes from EACLPP Workgroup meeting in Budapest July 2011

http://www.eaclpp.org/working-groups.html

Report from Working group meeting on MUS/somatisation/bodily distress, Budapest July 1st 2011

“…We should find out whether the WHO group for classification of somatic distress and dissociative disorders will provide a better diagnostic system for these disorders.”

6] Article: ‘Heartsinks’ and weird symptoms by Tony Dowell, June 15, 2011.

Article Table: Functional somatic syndromes according to medical speciality:
http://www.nzdoctor.co.nz/media/671495/heartsinks.pdf

Proposed new diagnoses of anxious depression and bodily stress syndrome in ICD-11-PHC: an international focus group study

Proposed new diagnoses of anxious depression and bodily stress syndrome in ICD-11-PHC: an international focus group study. [JOURNAL ARTICLE]

Post #196 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2pp

This paper, published on July 28, discusses field testing of two proposed categories for the forthcoming Primary Care version of ICD-11, “anxious depression” and “bodily stress syndrome (BSS)”.

“Bodily stress syndrome (BSS)” is currently proposed to replace ICD10-PHC’s “F45 Unexplained somatic complaints” which is the equivalent to ICD-10′s “F45 Somatoform Disorders” section.

For ICD11-PHC, it is proposed not to include the discrete category “Neurasthenia,” which would be subsumed under another category.

+++
Full text, subscription required:

Family Practice (2012) doi: 10.1093/fampra/cms037

First published online: July 28, 2012

http://fampra.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/07/20/fampra.cms037.long

http://fampra.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/07/20/fampra.cms037.full.pdf+html

Abstract

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22843638

Lam TP, Goldberg DP, Dowell AC, Fortes S, Mbatia JK, Minhas FA, Klinkman MS

Proposed new diagnoses of anxious depression and bodily stress syndrome in ICD-11-PHC: an international focus group study. [JOURNAL ARTICLE]

Fam Pract 2012 Jul 28.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization is revising the primary care classification of mental and behavioural disorders for the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11-Primary Health Care (PHC)) aiming to reduce the disease burden associated with mental disorders among member countries.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the opinions of primary care professionals on proposed new diagnostic entities in draft ICD-11-PHC, namely anxious depression and bodily stress syndrome (BSS).

METHODS: Qualitative study with focus groups of primary health-care workers, using standard interview schedule after draft ICD-11-PHC criteria for each proposed entity was introduced to the participants.

RESULTS: Nine focus groups with 4-15 participants each were held at seven locations: Austria, Brazil, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Pakistan, Tanzania and United Kingdom. There was overwhelming support for the inclusion of anxious depression, which was considered to be very common in primary care settings. However, there were concerns about the 2-week duration of symptoms being too short to make a reliable diagnosis. BSS was considered to be a better term than medically unexplained symptoms but there were disagreements about the diagnostic criteria in the number of symptoms required.

CONCLUSION: Anxious depression is well received by primary care professionals, but BSS requires further modification. International field trials will be held to further test these new diagnoses in draft ICD-11-PHC.

+++

Notes and related posts:

ICD10-PHC (the Primary Care version of ICD-10, which is sometimes written as ICD-10 PHC or ICD-10-PHC or ICD-10 PC), is a simplified version of the WHO’s ICD-10 for use in general practice and primary health care settings. This condensed classification system has rough but not exact equivalence to the main ICD-10 classifications.

For example, the ICD10-PHC mental and behavioural disorders chapter lists and describes 25 disorders commonly managed within primary care as opposed to circa 450 classified within Chapter V of ICD-10.

Click here for a chart showing the grouping of categories adapted from the full ICD-10 version for the existing ICD10-PHC mental health categories

Professor, Sir David Goldberg, M.D., Emeritus Professor, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College, London, is a member of the DSM-5 Mood Disorders Work Group. Prof Goldberg also chairs the Consultation Group for Classification in Primary Care that is making recommendations for the mental and behavioural disorders section of ICD11-PHC.

Other members of the ICD11-PHC Consultation Group include Michael Klinkman (GP, United States; Vice Chairman); Sally Chan (nurse, Singapore), Tony Dowell (GP, New Zealand) Sandra Fortes (psychiatrist, Brazil), Linda Gask (psychiatrist, UK), KS Jacob (psychiatrist, India), Tai-Pong Lam (GP, Hong Kong), Joseph Mbatia (psychiatrist, Tanzania), Fareed Minhas (psychiatrist, Pakistan), Marianne Rosendal (GP, Denmark), assisted by WHO Secretariat Geoffrey Reed and Shekhar Saxena.

The majority of patients with mental health problems are diagnosed and managed by general practitioners in primary care – not by psychiatrists and mental health specialists. ICD10-PHC is used in developed and developing countries in general medical settings and also used in the training of medical officers, nurses and multi purpose health workers.

See also Page 3 of this report:

Changes to ICD-11 Beta drafting platform: Bodily Distress Disorders (1)

Page 3, including Update at July 9: Second list of proposals for ICD11-PHC

Further information on ICD10-PHC and proposals for the mental health disorders section of ICD11-PHC can be found in these two documents:

1] Goldberg, D. Guest editorial. A revised mental health classification for use in general medical settings: the ICD11–PHC 1. International Psychiatry, Page 1, February 2011.

http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/IPv8n1.pdf

Note: The list of proposed categories in the editorial above has been superseded by the list in Chapter 2 of this book, below. (Source: Prof D Goldberg, who stresses these are draft proposals and subject to revision in the light of field trial results).

2] 21st Century Global Mental Health by Dr Eliot Sorel, Professor, George Washington University, Washington D.C.

Publication date: August, 2012: http://www.jblearning.com/catalog/9781449627874/

Page 51, Sample Chapter 2: http://samples.jbpub.com/9781449627874/Chapter2.pdf

Changes to ICD-11 Beta drafting platform: Bodily Distress Disorders (1)

Changes to ICD-11 Beta drafting platform: Bodily Distress Disorders (1)

Post #190 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2jB


+++

This four page post is a revised version of content first published on July 2, 2012.

Information in this report relates to proposals for the World Health Organization’s forthcoming ICD-11, currently scheduled for pilot dissemination in 2015+; it does not relate to the existing ICD-10 or to the forthcoming US specific “clinical modification” of ICD-10, known as ICD-10-CM.

Caveat: The ICD-11 Beta drafting process is a work in progress over the next two to three years. The Beta draft is updated on a daily basis. Parent terms, category terms and sorting codes assigned to categories are subject to change as work on chapter reorganization progresses. Images and text in this posting may not reflect the most recently assigned categories and codes. This post reflects the Beta draft as it stood at July 24, 2012. Please also read the ICD-11 Beta Draft Caveats.

This report updates on recent changes to the Somatoform Disorders section of the ICD-11 Beta drafting platform. The Beta drafting platform can be accessed here:

Beta draft Foundation view:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en

Beta draft Linearization view:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en
+++

How do the Somatoform Disorders categories currently stand in ICD-10?

ICD-10 Tabular List Version: 2010 can be accessed here: http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd10/browse/2010/en

ICD-10 Chapter V “Somatoform Disorders”

This is the section of ICD-10 that corresponds with the Somatoform Disorders section in DSM-IV. There is a degree of correspondence between current categories for this section of ICD-10 and for DSM-IV, as set out in the (simplified) table, below.

For clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines for ICD-10 Somatoform Disorders see Page 129 of the “Blue book”:

ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders: Clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines: http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/bluebook.pdf

Current DSM-IV Codes and Categories for Somatoform Disorders and ICD-10 Chapter V Equivalents

[Ed: Neurasthenia is not categorized within DSM-IV.]

Source: Mayou R, Kirmayer LJ, Simon G, Kroenke K, Sharpe M: Somatoform disorders: time for a new approach in DSM-V. Am J Psychiat. 2005;162:847–855.
+++
+++
This screenshot shows how the ICD-11 Beta draft had stood at June 24, 2012:

ICD-11 Beta Draft: Morbidity Linearization view


+++

For ICD-11 Beta draft, the proposal in June 2012 had been to rename ICD-10′s F45 Somatoform Disorders parent category to Bodily Distress Disorders.

Three new proposed terms: 9R0 Mild bodily distress disorder; 9R1 Moderate bodily distress disorder; 9R2 Severe bodily distress disorder were inserted above the 9R3 thru 9R8 legacy categories imported from ICD-10.

ID : http://who.int/icd#F45

05 Mental and behavioural disorders [Chapter V in ICD-10]

[...]

BODILY DISTRESS DISORDERS  [F45 Somatoform Disorders > F40-F48 Neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders in ICD-10]

9R0 Mild bodily distress disorder  [New term to ICD]
9R1 Moderate bodily distress disorder   [New term to ICD]
9R2 Severe bodily distress disorder  [New term to ICD]
9R3 Somatization disorder  [F45.0 in ICD-10]
9R4 Undifferentiated somatoform disorder  [F45.1 in ICD-10]
9R5 Somatoform autonomic dysfunction   [F45.3 in ICD-10]
9R6 Persistent somatoform pain disorder  [F45.4 in ICD-10] 
    ›  9R6.1 Persistent somatoform pain disorder
      9R6.2 Chronic pain disorder with somatic and psychological factors  [Not in ICD-10]
9R7 Other somatoform disorders  [F45.8 in ICD-10]
9R8 Somatoform disorder, unspecified  [F45.9 in ICD-10]

+++

Hypochondriacal disorder, coded at F45.2 in ICD-10, is currently renamed to Illness Anxiety Disorder for ICD-11 Beta draft and relocated under ANXIETY AND FEAR-RELATED DISORDERS:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en#/http%3a%2f%2fwho.int%2ficd%23F45.2

ID : http://who.int/icd#F45.2

9C5  ANXIETY AND FEAR-RELATED DISORDERS

      ›  9C5.6 Illness Anxiety Disorder

Continued on Page Two

What’s new in the ICD-11 Alpha drafting platform? (CFS, PVFS, ME)

What’s new in the ICD-11 Alpha drafting platform? (CFS, PVFS, ME)

Post #157 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-22h

 

Screenshot: ICD-11 Alpha Browser Foundation view selected, logged in at April 10, 2012:

Chapter 6: Diseases of the nervous system

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/http%3a%2f%2fwho.int%2ficd%23G93.3

Apr 09 – 11:02 UTC


 

ICD-11 Beta drafting platform to launch in May?

As reported in previous posts, according to the timeline, the ICD-11 Beta drafting platform is supposed to be launching this May.

ICD-11 Revision Steering Group has yet to announce whether the Beta platform remains on target for a May release and if so, on what date it will be launched – so I cannot give you a date yet.

Like the Alpha Drafting Browser, the Beta drafting platform will be a work in progress – not a final Beta draft. The final Beta isn’t scheduled until 2014, after the ICD-11 field trials have been undertaken.

When it does launch, the Beta platform is intended to be accessible to professionals and the public for viewing.

Registered or logged in users will have greater access to content and will be able to interact with the platform to read comments, comment on proposals and make suggestions, as part of the ongoing drafting process.  

In the meantime, the publicly viewable version of the Alpha drafting platform (known as the ICD-11 Alpha Browser) can still be accessed here:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en

The various ICD-11 Revision Topic Advisory Groups are carrying out their draft preparation work on a separate, more complex multi-author drafting platform that is accessible only to WHO and ICD Revision personnel.

 

Alpha drafting platform

As before, the publicly viewable version of the Alpha Browser should be viewed with the following caveats in mind:

the Alpha draft is a work in progress; it is incomplete; it may contain errors and omissions; it is in a state of flux and updated daily; textual content, codes and “Sorting labels” are subject to change as chapters are reorganized and content populated; the content has not been approved by Topic Advisory Groups, Revision Steering Group or WHO.

It is possible to register, or sign into the platform using existing accounts with several third party account providers such as Google, Yahoo and myOpenID, for increased access and functionality. Once signed in, Comments and Questions can be read and PDFs of the drafts of the top level linearizations can be downloaded from the Linearization tab.

See the Alpha Browser User Guide for information on how the Alpha Browser functions:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/Help/en

 

The ICD-11 “Content Model”

ICD-11 will be available in both print and online versions and unlike most chapters of ICD-10, will include descriptive content for ICD terms.

For the online version of ICD-11, all ICD entities will include a definition and a number of additional key descriptive fields – between 7 and 13 pre-defined parameters, populated according to a common “Content Model” (Content Model Reference Guide January 2011).

For example, ICD entity Title, Definition, Synonyms, Narrower Terms, Exclusions, Body Site, Body System, Signs and Symptoms, Causal Mechanisms, and possibly Diagnostic Criteria for some entities.*

*According to the iCAT User Google Group message board, these fields may have been revised since the January 2011 Content Model Reference Guide was published; Content Model parameters in the Beta draft may therefore differ from those currently displaying in the public Alpha drafting platform.

The print version will use a concise version of Definition due to space constraints.

In the Alpha Browser, not all these Content Model parameters display in the Foundation and Linearization views and not all of the parameters that have been listed for individual entities have had their draft text added yet, as some chapters are more advanced for the population of proposed content than others.

So the Alpha draft is still very patchy and many entities have no Definition and little or no other proposed content filled in.

With no “Category Discussion Notes” or “Change history” pop-up windows visible in the public version of the Alpha, the viewer cannot determine the rationales behind the reorganization of terms and hierarchies within the various chapters.

 

Chapter location and hierarchy for CFS, PVFS and (Benign) ME in ICD-11

I have been reporting since June 2010 that the proposals for ICD-11 Alpha Draft, as far as one could determine, appeared to be:

1] That a change of hierarchy had been recorded in a “Category Discussion Note”, dated May 1, 2010, between ICD-10 Title term “Postviral fatigue syndrome” and “Chronic fatigue syndrome”. (“Category Discussion Notes” and “Change History” pop-ups did display in the earlier iCAT version of the Alpha drafting platform.)

You can view a screenshot from June 2010 of that “Change history” record here:

http://dxrevisionwatch.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/change-history-gj92-cfs.png

The Definition field on the “Chronic fatigue syndrome” description panel in the current Alpha Browser is currently blank but in June 2010, the Definition had stood as in this contemporaneous screenshot:

http://dxrevisionwatch.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/2icatgj92cfsdef.png

2] That “Chronic fatigue syndrome” had been designated as an ICD-11 Title term within ICD-11 Chapter 6: Diseases of the nervous system, with the capacity for a Definition and up to 10 additional descriptive parameters.

3] That “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” had been specified as an Inclusion term to ICD-11 Title term “Chronic fatigue syndrome” but that the relationships between the three terms, PVFS, (B) ME and CFS had yet to be specified, as in this screenshot from June 2010:

http://dxrevisionwatch.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/2icatgj92cfsterms.png

 

What is currently showing in the Chapter 6 Foundation Component?

It isn’t possible to bring up a discrete ICD Title listing for either “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” or “Postviral fatigue syndrome” in either the Foundation Component or the Linearization.

In the Foundation view only, for Chapter 6: Diseases of the nervous system, “Chronic fatigue syndrome” is listed as a Title term with the ICD-10 legacy ID “ID:http://who.int/icd#G93.3″;

the Definition field is currently blank;

a list of terms has recently been added under “Synonyms”;

one term has recently been added under “Narrower Terms”.

(Note: there is a small asterisk at the end of term “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” which is listed at the top of the “Synonyms” list. The asterisk “Hover text” reads “This term is an inclusion term in the linearizations.”)

If you want to view the listing directly on the Browser site (note the “Comment” and “Questions” icons which open up pop-up windows next to terms for reading/commenting won’t display unless you have already registered and logged in) go here:

ICD-11 Alpha Browser Foundation view:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/http%3a%2f%2fwho.int%2ficd%23G93.3

ID:http://who.int/icd#G93.3

Chronic fatigue syndrome

Parent(s)

Selected cause is Remainder of diseases of the nervous system in Condensed and selected Infant and child mortality lists
Selected Cause is All other diseases in the Selected General mortality list
Selected cause is Diseases of the nervous system

Definition

This entity does not have a definition at the moment.

Synonyms

Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis *  [Ed: Hover text over asterisk reads: "This term is an inclusion term in the linearizations."]
akureyri
akureyri disease
cfs – chronic fatigue syndrome
chronic fatigue syndrome nos   [Ed: from current proposals for ICD-10-CM, Chapter 18, R53.82]
chronic fatigue, unspecified   [Ed: from current proposals for ICD-10-CM, Chapter 18, R53.82]
epidemic neuromyasthenia
iceland disease
icelandic disease
me – myalgic encephalomyelitis
myalgic encephalomyelitis
myalgic encephalomyelitis syndrome
postviral fatigue syndrome
pvfs – postviral fatigue syndrome

Narrower Terms

neuromyasthenia

Body Site

Entire brain (body structure)
Brain structure (body structure)

Causal Mechanisms

Virus (organism)

 

What’s new in Chapter 5: Mental and behavioural disorders?

As reported in Dx Revision Watch post: http://wp.me/pKrrB-1Vx,  the category “Somatoform Disorders” in Chapter 5, Mental and behavioural disorders is currently renamed to “BODILY DISTRESS DISORDERS”, under which currently sit three new child categories:

5M0 Mild bodily distress disorder
5M1 Moderate bodily distress disorder
5M2 Severe bodily distress disorder.

Chapter 5 Linearization view:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en#/http%3a%2f%2fwho.int%2ficd%23F45

Chapter 5 Foundation view:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/http%3a%2f%2fwho.int%2ficd%23F45

(Click on the little grey arrows to display the child categories):

Child categories to parent ”BODILY DISTRESS DISORDERS”:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/http%3a%2f%2fwho.int%2ficd%231905_dd0250d2_e8cd_4c48_a93f_7997cc1c8b07

BODILY DISTRESS DISORDERS

5M0 Mild bodily distress disorder
5M1 Moderate bodily distress disorder
5M2 Severe bodily distress disorder
5M3 Somatization disorder
5M4 Undifferentiated somatoform disorder
5M5 Somatoform autonomic dysfunction
5M6 Persistent somatoform pain disorder
      > 5M6.0 Persistent somatoform pain disorder
      > 5M6.1 Chronic pain disorder with somatic and psycological [sic] factors
5M7 Other somatoform disorders
5M8 Somatoform disorder, unspecified

None of these three new (proposed) categories have had any Definitions or other textual content added to the description panels on the right hand side of the Alpha Browser page since I first reported this change in February.

It is still not possible to determine what disorders ICD-11 intends might be captured by these three new (proposed) terms, should ICD-11 Revision Steering Group and WHO classification experts consider these terms to be valid constructs and approve their progression through to the Beta draft.

Because no “Change Notes” or “Change history” pop-up windows display in this version of the Alpha Drafting browser, it is not possible to determine:

whether ICD-11 is proposing to introduce three new terms – 5M0 Mild bodily distress disorder; 5M1 Moderate bodily distress disorder; 5M2 Severe bodily distress disorder, in addition to retaining existing ICD-10 terms, 5M3 thru 5M8;

how ICD Revision intends to define these (proposed) new terms at 5M0, 5M1, 5M2;

how these three (proposed) new terms would relate to the existing ICD-10 “Somatoform Disorders” categories which remain listed as child categories to “BODILY DISTRESS DISORDERS” (apart from “Hypochondriacal disorder” [ICD-10: F45.2], which is now listed as “5H0.5 Illness Anxiety Disorder” in the ICD-11 Alpha Draft).

(See Page 1 and 2 of my report: “Bodily Distress Disorders” to replace “Somatoform Disorders” for ICD-11?: http://wp.me/pKrrB-1Vx  )

 

References:

ICD-11 Revision: http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/en/

ICD-11 Alpha Browser User Guide: http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/caveat/en/index.html
Alpha Browser Foundation view: http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#
Alpha Browser Linearization view: http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en#
“Bodily Distress Disorders” to replace “Somatoform Disorders” for ICD-11?: http://wp.me/pKrrB-1Vx

“Bodily Distress Disorders” to replace “Somatoform Disorders” for ICD-11?

“Bodily Distress Disorders” to replace “Somatoform Disorders” for ICD-11?

Post #145 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-1Vx

The information in this report relates only to proposals for the WHO’s forthcoming ICD-11; it does not relate to ICD-10 or to the forthcoming US specific “clinical modification” of ICD-10, known as ICD-10-CM.

Codes assigned to ICD-11 Beta draft categories are subject to change as chapter reorganization progresses. Images and text in this posting may not reflect the most recently assigned codes. This post has been updated to reflect the launch of the Beta drafting platform and revisions to codes assigned during the drafting process as they stand at June 24, 2012.

Part One

 

This report contains an important update on proposals for ICD-11 Chapter 5: Mental and behavioural disorders.

In a February 16, 2012 report by Tom Sullivan for Health Care Finance News, Christopher Chute, MD, who chairs the ICD Revision Steering Group, warned of a possible delay for completion of ICD-11 from 2015 to 2016.

The ICD-11 Beta drafting platform was launched in May 2012.

The Beta drafting platform is a publicly viewable browser similar to the Alpha drafting platform that had been in the public domain since May, 2011.

You can view the Beta Drafting Browser here:

Foundation Component view:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en

Morbidity Linearization view:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en

The Morbidity Linearization is the view that includes (what may be temporarily assigned) sorting codes. These codes are likely to change as chapter organization progresses. Click on the small grey arrows next to the chapters and categories to display parent > child > grandchildren hierarchies. Click on individual terms to display descriptive content in the right hand frame of the Beta Browser.

Textual content for ICD-11 is in the process of being drafted and the population of content for some chapters is more advanced than others. Content for some of the “ICD-11 Content Model” parameters may display: ID legacy code from ICD-10 (where applicable); Parent(s); Definition; Synonyms; Inclusions; Narrower Terms; Exclusions; Body Site; Causal Mechanism; Signs and Symptoms.

(For ICD-11, entities will be defined across all chapters through up to 13 “Content Model” parameters – considerably more descriptive content than in ICD-10 and a significant workload for the Topic Advisory Group members and managers who are generating the content for ICD-11.)

The Beta Browser User Guide is here:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/Help/en

This page of the User Guide sets out differences between Foundation view and Morbidity Linearization view.

The various ICD Revision Topic Advisory Groups (TAGs) are carrying out their work on a separate, more complex, multi-author drafting platform. On their platform, editing histories and “Category and Discussion Notes” are recorded so the progress of proposals and reorganization of ICD entities can be tracked, as the draft evolves.

For the Beta drafting platform, interested stakeholders may register for increased access and interaction with the drafting process by submitting comments and suggestions on draft content and proposals.

For those registered for increased access, it is possible to download PDFs of drafts for the “Print Versions for the ICD-11 Beta Morbidity Linearization” for all 25 chapters of ICD-11. These are obtainable, once registered and logged in, from the Linearization > Print Versions tab.

Caveats

I’m going to reiterate the ICD-11 Alpha Browser Caveats because it’s important to understand that the ICD-11 Beta draft is a work in progress – not a static document – and is subject to change.

The draft is updated on a (usually) daily basis; when you view the Beta Browser, you are viewing a “snapshot” of how the publicly viewable draft stood at the end of the previous day; not all chapters are as advanced as others for reorganization or population of content; the draft is incomplete and may contain errors and omissions.

The codes and “sorting labels” assigned to ICD parent classes, child and grandchildren terms are subject to change as reorganization of the chapters progresses. The Beta draft has not yet been approved by the Topic Advisory Groups, Revision Steering Group or WHO and proposals for, and content in the draft may not progress to the Beta drafting stage; field trials have not yet been completed – so be mindful of the fact that the draft is in a state of flux.

As it currently stands, the Beta draft lacks clarity; not all textual content will have been generated and uploaded for terms imported from ICD-10 and there may be no definitions or other textual content displaying for proposed new terms.

Two chapters that are a focus of this site are Chapter 5: Mental and behavioural disorders and Chapter 6: Disorders of the nervous system (the Neurology chapter). (ICD-11 is dropping the use of Roman numerals.)

I won’t be reporting on specific categories in Chapter 6 in this post but will do a follow up post for Chapter 6 in a forthcoming post; again, there is a lack of clarity for Chapter 6 and requests for specific clarifications, last year, from the chair of Topic Advisory Group Neurology and the lead WHO Secretariat for TAG Neurology have met with no response.

Continued on Page 2: Somatoform Disorders in ICD-10; Somatoform Disorders to Bodily Distress Disorders for ICD-11?