DSM-5 Round up: April #1

April 1, 2013 by

DSM-5 Round up: April #1

Post #231 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2In

New York Post

A disease called ‘childhood’

Do 1 in 5 NYC preteens really suffer a mental woe? A psychiatry expert argues we’re overdiagnosing —and overmedicating — our kids

Allen Frances MD | March 30, 2013

Last week, The Post reported that more than 145,000 city children struggle with mental illness or other emotional problems. That estimate, courtesy of New York’s Health Department, equals an amazing 1 in 5 kids. Could that possibly be true?

+++
BBC Radio 4

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01rl1q8

Medicalising Grief

Will the book that classifies mental illness lead to the medicalisation of grief?

Presented by Matthew Hill. Featuring Drs Jerome Wakefield, Lisa Cosgrove, Allen Frances (Chaired the Task Force for DSM-IV), Joanne Cacciatore and Gary Greenberg.

Available to listen again for the next 7 days online.

Counseling Today ACA podcasts help counselors prepare for DSM-5

Heather Rudow | March 27, 2013

Rebecca Daniel-Burke, ACA’s [American Counseling Association]director of professional projects and staff liaison to ACA’s DSM-5 Task Force, hosts the podcast series, which offers counselors a way to prepare for and understand potential changes. Daniel-Burke spoke with K. Dayle Jones for the first, 38-minute podcast, and Jason King for the second, which is 52 minutes long and available for CE credit…

+++

The New York Times invited readers to respond for a dialogue about psychiatric diagnoses and the forthcoming DSM-5. The dialogue was initiated by a letter from Ronald Pies, which concludes “‘Diagnosis’ means knowing the difference between one condition and another. For many patients, learning the name of their disorder may relieve years of anxious uncertainty. So long as diagnosis is carried out carefully and respectfully, it may be eminently humanizing. Indeed, diagnosis remains the gateway to psychiatry’s pre-eminent goal of relieving the patient’s suffering.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/opinion/invitation-to-a-dialogue-psychiatric-diagnoses.html

Ronald Pies

Controversy surrounding the soon-to-be-released fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM-5 — often called “psychiatry’s bible” — has cast a harsh light on psychiatric diagnosis. For psychiatry’s more radical critics, psychiatric diagnoses are merely “myths” or “socially constructed labels.” But even many who accept the reality of, say, major depression argue that current psychiatric diagnoses often “stigmatize” or “dehumanize” people struggling with ordinary grief, stress or anxiety…

Published responses:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/24/opinion/sunday/sunday-dialogue-defining-mental-illness.html

Letters
Sunday Dialogue: Defining Mental Illness

Response to Letters from Ronald Pies via Psychiatric Times

http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/blog/pies/content/article/10168/2135248

Diagnosis and its Discontents: The DSM Debate Continues

Ronald W. Pies, MD | 29 March 2013

Dr Pies is Editor-in-Chief Emeritus of Psychiatric Times, and a professor in the psychiatry departments of SUNY Upstate Medical University and Tufts University School of Medicine. He is the author of The Judaic Foundations of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; a collection of short stories, Ziprin’s Ghost; and, most recently, a poetry chapbook, The Heart Broken Open. His most recent book is The Three-Petalled Rose: How the Synthesis of Judaism, Buddhism, and Stoicism Can Create a Healthy, Fulfilled and Flourishing Life (iUniverse: 2013).

“As to diseases, make a habit of two things—to help, or at least to do no harm.”
–Hippocrates, Epidemics, in Hippocrates, trans. W. H. S. Jones (1923), Vol. I, 165 [italics added]

“An agnostic is someone who doesn’t know, and di– is a Greek prefix meaning “two.” So “diagnostic” means someone who doesn’t know twice as much as an agnostic doesn’t know.”
–Walt Kelly, Pogo

A funny thing happened to me on the way to the New York Times “Sunday Dialogue” —I made myself unclear.¹ This is not supposed to happen to careful writers, or to those of us who flatter ourselves with that honorific. So what went wrong?

In brief, I greatly underestimated the public’s strong identification of psychiatric diagnosis with the categorical approach of the recent DSMs. But whereas my letter to the Times was indeed occasioned by DSM-5’s release in May, my argument in defense of psychiatric diagnosis was not a testimonial in favor of any one type of diagnostic scheme—categorical, dimensional, prototypical² or otherwise…

http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/The-Achilles-Heel.htm

Stephen Ralph | March 30, 2013

In recent years I have been considering the reliability of the whole “CFS/ME” diagnostic process.

From personal experience I have encountered numerous doctors who failed to possess the detailed specialist knowledge they needed to make a diagnosis of Behçet’s disease at both GP and specialist level.

From personal experience I have learned that standard blood tests or even CT/MRI scans or indeed other diagnostic tests such as endoscopy can and do fail to detect a complex clinical disease present in a patient.

I have no doubt that there is a diagnostic black hole between the insufficient knowledge of the doctor and pathologies that are not detectable by the basic tests they choose to request which produce negative results they then choose to rely on.

The diagnoses of “CFS/ME” and now Somatic Symptom Disorder have in my view been deployed by liaison psychiatry to exploit that black hole.

Read more of this post

Filed under Allen Frances, American Psychiatric Association (APA), Bereavement, Chronic fatigue syndrome, Criticism of DSM-V, DSM-5, DSM-5 in the media, MUS, Myalgic encephalomyelitis, Somatic Symptom Disorder, Somatoform Disorders Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Rapid Responses to BMJ DSM-5 ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ opposition piece

March 26, 2013 by

Rapid Responses to Allen Frances’ BMJ opposition piece on DSM-5‘s ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’

Post #230 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2HN

Update March 28: Currently 27 BMJ Rapid Responses have been published. BMJ has also launched a Poll asking readers to vote on: “Will the new DSM-5 lead to patients being mislabelled as mentally ill?” Vote on this page

Update March 26: a tautology that serves no useful purpose… 1 Boring Old man on SSD

On March 20, BMJ published a commentary on the DSM-5 ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ by Allen Frances, MD, with contribution from Dx Revision Watch, strongly opposing the inclusion of this new, poorly tested disorder in the forthcoming DSM-5, scheduled for publication on May 22.

Dr Frances is professor emeritus, Duke, and had chaired of the Task Force for DSM-IV.

Article here:

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 is also featured in this week’s “Editor’s Choice”:

Editor’s Choice
US Editor’s Choice

DSM-5 and the rough ride from approval to publication

Edward Davies, US news and features editor, BMJ

Rapid Responses to the BMJ article can be read here:

http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f1580?tab=responses

24 Rapid Responses have been published. I am publishing both my submissions, below:

Suzy Chapman
Patient advocate

27 March 2013

What evidence for safety of application of SSD in children?

Extracts from Somatic Symptom Disorders Work Group ‘Disorders Description’ document, published May 2011, for the second DSM-5 stakeholder review [1]:

“The presentation of these symptoms may vary across the lifespan. A corroborative historian with a life course perspective may provide important information for both the elderly and for children.”

“PFAMC [Psychological Factors Affecting Medical Condition]* can occur across the lifespan. Particularly with young children, corroborative history from parents or school can assist the diagnostic evaluation.”

“In the elderly somatic symptoms and comorbid medical illnesses are more common, and thus a focus on criteria B becomes more important. In the young child, the ‘B criteria’ may be principally expressed by the parent.”

It appears, then, that the ‘B type’ Somatic Symptom Disorder (SSD) criteria are intended for application where the parent(s) of a child with chronic somatic symptoms are perceived to be expressing ‘excessive thoughts, feelings, and behaviors,’ or ‘disproportionate and persistent concerns,’ or ‘maladaptive’ coping strategies; or considered to be devoting ‘excessive time and energy’ to [a child’s] symptoms or health concerns or demonstrating ‘dysfunctional and maladaptive beliefs’ about symptoms or disease.

There is no evidence that SSD or PFAMC have been field tested by APA or by any other group for safety and reliability of application in children and young people.

If the finalized criteria sets and texts for this section allow for the application of a diagnosis of Somatic Symptom Disorder where a parent is considered to be excessively concerned with a child’s symptoms, families caring for children with any chronic disease or condition may be placed at risk of wrongful accusation of ‘over-involvement’ with a child’s symptomatology.

Where a parent is perceived as enabling ‘maintenance of sick role behaviour’ in a child or young person this can provoke a devastating cascade of intervention: placement or threat of placement on the ‘at risk register’; social services and child protection investigation; in some cases, court intervention for removal of a sick child out of the home environment and into foster care or for enforced in-patient rehabilitation against the wishes of the family.

This is already happening in the UK, USA and currently in Denmark, in families with a child or young person with chronic illness or disability, notably with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome or ME. It may happen more frequently in families where a diagnosis of chronic childhood illness + SSD has been applied.

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 urgent scrutiny and investigation.

*Note: In DSM-IV-TR, PFAMC is located in the Appendix under ‘Other Conditions That May Be a Focus of Clinical Attention.’ For DSM-5, PFAMC is being relocated to the mental disorders classifications and coded under the new section ‘Somatic Symptoms and Related Disorders’ that replaces DSM-IV-TR’s ‘Somatoform Disorders.’

References:

1 Somatic Symptom Disorders Work Group ‘Disorders Description’ document, second stakeholder review, May 2011
Competing interests: I reviewed and provided comment and suggestions for this BMJ commentary by Allen Frances, MD. I run a website that archives and reports on DSM-5 and ICD-11 activities.

+++
Suzy Chapman
Patient advocate

26 March 2013

Dichotomy

I am puzzled by the disconnect between the cautiousness expressed within this 2011 article by Dr Dimsdale [1] and his work group’s barrelling through with a new construct, which James Phillips notes [2] lacks a high level of empirical support.

Dr Dimsdale is evidently aware of the perils of over diagnosing mental illness and identifies inter alia that a number of factors influence the accuracy of diagnoses: that one must consider how thorough was the physician’s evaluation; how adequate the physician’s knowledge base in synthesizing the information obtained from the history and physical examination; that time pressures in primary care make it difficult to comprehensively evaluate patients and thus contribute to delays and slips in diagnosis; that physicians can wear blinders or have tunnel vision in evaluating patients – that just because a patient has previously had MUS [Medically Unexplained Symptoms] that there is no guarantee that the patient has yet another MUS; that diagnoses are shaped by the state of medical knowledge at the time when the patient is evaluated; that new diseases are constantly arising; that aetiologies are eventually established for diseases that have previously not been well understood.

Yet the group is proposing to operationalize an entirely new disorder of its own devising, using highly subjective criteria for which no significant body of research into reliability, validity and safety has been published, that will capture adults, children, adolescents and elderly people with diverse illnesses.

Whilst it was welcomed that for the third iteration, the chronicity criteria of “greater than one month” was removed with the merging of SSSD [Simple Somatic Symptom Disorder] with CSSD  [Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder], it is of considerable concern that in order to accommodate SSSD within the CSSD criteria, the “B type” threshold has been reduced from “at least two” to “at least one,” thereby potentially increasing prevalence.

It is also of considerable concern that no data on prevalence estimates were available for the second and third draft review and no data on impact of different thresholds for the “B type” criteria.

In light of the field trial findings, it is also of concern that the SSD work group has yet to publish any projections for prevalence estimates and the potential increase in mental health diagnoses across the entire disease landscape, nor on the projected clinical and economic burden of providing CBT and similar therapies for patients for whom an additional diagnosis of Somatic Symptom Disorder is assigned.

Given the majority of mental health disorders are diagnosed and treated within primary care and non-psychiatric settings, it is remarkable that the Task Force failed to recruit any general practitioners or clinicians outside the field of psychiatry and psychosomatics to serve on this work group, nor a medico-legal specialist.

In a counterpoint response to Allen Frances’ May 2012 New York Times Op-Ed piece, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) stated:

“…There are actually relatively few substantial changes to draft disorder criteria. Those that have been recommended are based on the scientific and clinical evidence amassed over the past 20 years and then are subject to multiple review processes within the APA.”

The Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders chapter is one section for which substantial changes to existing definitions and criteria are being introduced but with no body of rigorous evidence to support the SSD construct – a construct already influencing proposals for a new ICD classification, “Bodily Distress Disorder” for the World Health Organization’s ICD-11 and ICD-11-PHC (primary care) version, to replace several of ICD-10’s existing Somatoform Disorder categories.

During the second public review of draft criteria for DSM-5, the ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ section received more submissions from advocacy organizations, patients, and professionals than almost any other disorder category. But rather than tighten up the criteria or subject the entire disorder section to independent scientific review, the SSD Work Group’s response was to lower the threshold even further – potentially pulling even more patients under a mental disorder label.

In February, Dr Dimsdale 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.” [3]

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. Patient groups, advocates and professionals are not reassured by APA’s ‘publish first – patch later’ approach to science.

Dr Dimsdale has described his group’s revision as “a step in the right direction.” But DSM-5 appears hell bent on stumbling blindly from the “treacherous foundation” of ‘medically unexplained’ into the quicksands of loose, unvalidated constructs.

The appropriate response would be for APA to pull this disorder out of the main diagnostic section, now, before its new manual rolls off the presses and relocate under the “V codes.”

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

2 BMJ Rapid Response: http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f1580/rr/637773

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

Competing interests: I reviewed and provided comment and suggestions for this BMJ commentary by Allen Frances, MD. I run a website that archives and reports on DSM-5 and ICD-11 activities.

Related content

The President’s Message in the Spring edition of The National Forum, newsletter of the National CFIDS Foundation Inc. (Vol. 18, No. 4 Spring 2013) is devoted to the DSM-5 SSD issue and can also be read here on their website.

Allen Frances, MD, blogs at DSM 5 in Distress, and Saving Normal at Psychology Today.

Mislabeling Medical Illness As Mental Disorder December 8, 2012

Bad News DSM-5 Refuses To Correct Somatic Symptom Disorder January 16, 2013

For additional commentary on ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’:

Somatic Symptom Disorder could capture millions more under mental health diagnosis by Suzy Chapman for Dx Revision Watch, May 26, 2012

Filed under Allen Frances, American Psychiatric Association (APA), Bodily Distress Disorders, Criticism of DSM-V, DSM-5, DSM-5, DSM-5 draft proposals, DSM-5 field trials, DSM-5 in the media, Somatic Symptom Disorder, Somatoform Disorders Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ – the most ubiquitous mental health diagnosis you never heard of

March 19, 2013 by

‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ – the most ubiquitous mental health diagnosis you never heard of

Lead psychiatrist for DSM-IV voices opposition to DSM-5’s new ‘catch-all’ criteria in BMJ, today

Post #229 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2GI

Update: Rapid Responses to the BMJ article can be read here:

http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f1580?tab=responses

+++
The opinion piece published under BMJ’s “Personal View” section, on Wednesday, is now featured in this week’s “Editor’s Choice”:

http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f1918

Editor’s Choice
US Editor’s Choice

DSM-5 and the rough ride from approval to publication

BMJ2013;346doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f1918 (Published 22 March 2013)

Edward Davies, US news and features editor, BMJ

Update: Media coverage for BMJ article:

Times of India

Eat or surf a lot? You risk being labelled mentally ill

Malathy Iyer, TNN | Mar 24, 2013

…Earlier this week, American psychiatrist Allen Frances, who helped devise the fourth edition of the manual (DSM-IV), lashed out against the new installment in the British Medical Journal. “It risks mislabelling a sizeable number of population as mentally ill,” Frances wrote.

He is disturbed about a new introduction called ‘somatic symptom disorder’ that will need only one bodily symptom distressing or disrupting daily life for about six months. “This new category will extend the scope of mental disorder classification by eliminating the requirement that somatic symptoms must be medically unexplained,” he wrote. In a field trial study to check for somatic symptom disorder, the results included 15% of patients with cancer or heart disease and 26% with irritable bowel syndrome or fibromyalgia. “The rate of psychiatric disorder among medically ill patients is unknown, but these rates seem high,” added Frances.

Doctors in India are not too supportive of the somatic symptom disorder…

+++
Medscape Medical News > Psychiatry

DSM-5 Somatic Symptom Disorder Debate Rages On

Deborah Brauser | March 21, 2013

The inclusion of the new somatic symptom disorder category in the soon-to-be-released Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) continues to spark heated debate in the field of psychiatry.

In a “Personal View” published online March 19 in BMJ, Allen Frances, MD, writes that the new disorder could result in “inappropriate diagnoses of mental disorder and inappropriate medical decision making” and urged clinicians to ignore the category completely…

…”The proposed diagnosis is unsupported by any substantial evidence on its likely validity and safety and was strongly opposed by patients, families, caregivers, and advocacy organizations,” he writes.

“Every diagnostic decision is a delicate balancing act between definitions that will result in too much versus too little diagnosis — the DSM-5 work group chose a remarkably sensitive definition that is also remarkably non-specific.”

He adds that clinicians should just ignore this classification altogether…

(Free registration for access to full article.)

Rheumatology Update

New ‘somatic symptom disorder’ captures fibromyalgia

Tony James | March 22, 2013

The new diagnosis of ‘somatic symptom disorder’ due for inclusion in the American Psychiatric Association’s updated diagnostic manual will capture up to a quarter of fibromyalgia patients…

Psychiatry Update (Australia)

Clinicians urged to ignore DSM-5 ‘somatic symptom disorder’

Tony James | March 20, 2013

The chair of the DSM-IV task force has told clinicians to ignore the new diagnosis of ‘somatic symptom disorder’ in DSM-5.

In a strongly-worded critique in this week’s BMJ, Professor Frances said that every diagnostic decision was a delicate balancing act between over-diagnosis and under-diagnosis…

“…The diagnosis of somatic symptom disorder is based on subjective and difficult to measure cognitions that will enable a ‘bolt-on’ diagnosis of mental disorder to be applied to all medical conditions, irrespective of cause.”

Field trials had shown that the new definition captured 15% of patients with cancer or heart disease and 26% with irritable bowel syndrome or fibromyalgia.

(Registered Medical Practitioner site; registration required for access to full article.)

+++
Inform 21

Un nuevo trastorno podría clasificar a millones de personas como enfermos mentales

March 21, 2013

+++
UK Times

The Times Mental Health

Psychologists to fight new list of mental illnesses

Martin Barrow, Health Editor | March 21, 2013

Everyday Health

Why Obsessing Over Physical Symptoms Could Equal Mental Illness

A psychiatrist argues in a new paper that a change in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) could lead to misdiagnosis of people with cancer and heart disease as mentally ill.

Jaimie Dalessio | Everyday Health Staff Writer | March 20, 2013

Come May, everyone with chronic medical illness or long-term pain – from cancer to coronary disease, MS to myalgia, becomes a potential candidate for a new mental health label.

+++

On Wednesday, BMJ publishes a commentary on the DSM-5 ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ by Allen Frances, MD, who chaired the Task Force for DSM-IV, with contribution from Dx Revision Watch:

http://www.bmj.com/uk/comment

Full article available without subscription, here:

http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f1580

PDF here:

http://www.bmj.com/highwire/filestream/636761/field_highwire_article_pdf/0/bmj.f1580.full.pdf

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

Allen Frances chair of the DSM-IV task force

The fuzzy boundary between psychiatry and general medicine is about to experience a seismic shift. The next edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is scheduled for release this May amid controversy about many of its new disorders. Among these, DSM-5 introduces a poorly tested diagnosis—somatic symptom disorder—which risks mislabeling a sizeable proportion of the population as mentally ill…

BMJ Media release will be available here:

http://group.bmj.com/group/media/latest-news

Psychiatric creep

For DSM-5, the somatoform disorders section is being dismantled and four rarely used disorders are being replaced by a single new diagnosis, ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder.’

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’ symptoms or somatic symptoms in association with diagnosed medical illness.

From May, patients with common diseases like cancer, angina, diabetes or multiple sclerosis; with long-term pain, chronic illnesses like irritable bowel syndrome, fibromyalgia or CFS, or with unexplained conditions that have so far presented with somatic (bodily) symptoms of unclear cause may qualify for an additional mental disorder diagnosis of ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ if the clinician considers they also meet the criteria for ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder,’ and may benefit from treatment.

The SSD criteria set focuses on the psychological impact of persistent, distressing bodily symptoms on the patient’s thoughts, feelings and behaviors and the degree to which their response is considered ‘disproportionate’ or ‘excessive.’

As the criteria stand, this new disorder will potentially result in a ‘bolt-on’ mental health diagnosis being applied to all chronic illnesses and medical conditions if the clinician decides the patient’s response to distressing symptoms is ‘excessive’ or their coping strategies are ‘maladaptive,’ or that they are ‘catastrophising’ or displaying ‘fear avoidance.’ Or 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 an additional diagnosis of SSD.

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, will also be vulnerable to misdiagnosis with a mental disorder.

There is no substantial body of research to support the validity, reliability or safety of the ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ diagnosis.

During the second public review of draft criteria for DSM-5, the ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ section received more submissions from advocacy organizations, patients, and professionals than almost any other disorder category. But rather than tighten up the criteria or subject the entire disorder section to independent scientific review, the SSD Work Group’s response has been to lower the threshold even further – potentially pulling even more patients under a mental disorder label.

The ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ Work Group rejected eleventh hour calls from professionals and patients to review its criteria before going to print.

APA says there will be opportunities to reassess and revise DSM-5s new disorders, post publication, and that it intends to start work on a ‘DSM-5.1′ release. Patient groups, advocates and professionals are not reassured by a ‘publish first – patch later’ approach to science.

Notes for media, websites, bloggers:

1. The next edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) will be published by American Psychiatric Publishing Inc. in May 2013. It will be known as ‘DSM-5′ and has been under development since 1999.
http://www.dsm5.org/Pages/Default.aspx
http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/DSM%205%20development%20factsheet%201-16-13.pdf

2. The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has spent $25 million on the development of DSM-5.

3. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders is used by mental health and medical professionals for diagnosing and coding mental disorders. It is used by psychiatrists, psychologists, therapists, counselors, primary health care physicians, nurses, social workers, occupational and rehabilitation therapists and allied health professionals.

The DSM is also used for medical insurance reimbursement and informs government, public health policy, courts and legal specialists, education, forensic science, prisons, drug regulation agencies, pharmaceutical companies and researchers. Diagnostic criteria defined within DSM determine what is considered a mental disorder and what is not, which treatments and therapies health insurers will authorise funding for, and for how long.

4. Four existing disorder categories in the DSM-IV ‘Somatoform Disorders’ section: somatization disorder [300.81], hypochondriasis [300.7], pain disorder, and undifferentiated somatoform disorder [300.82] will be eliminated and replaced with a single new category – ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ for DSM-5.

5. APA has held three stakeholder comment periods during which professional and public stakeholders have been invited to submit comment on the proposals for the revision of DSM-IV categories and criteria (in February-April 2010; May-June 2011; May-June 2012).

6. DSM-5 is slated for release at the American Psychiatric Association’s 166th Annual Meeting, San Francisco (May 18-22, 2013). The new manual is available for pre-order and will cost $199: http://www.psychiatry.org/dsm5

7. Allen Frances, MD, was chair of the DSM-IV Task Force and of the Department of Psychiatry at Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Dr Frances is currently professor emeritus, Duke.

8. Dr Frances blogs at DSM 5 in Distress, and Saving Normal at Psychology Today.

Mislabeling Medical Illness As Mental Disorder was published on December 8, 2012

Bad News DSM-5 Refuses To Correct Somatic Symptom Disorder was published on January 16, 2013

For additional information on ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’:

Somatic Symptom Disorder could capture millions more under mental health diagnosis by Suzy Chapman for Dx Revision Watch, May 26, 2012

Suzy Chapman

Filed under Allen Frances, American Psychiatric Association (APA), Criticism of DSM-V, DSM-5, DSM revision process, DSM-5, DSM-5 draft proposals, DSM-5 field trials, DSM-5 in the media, Somatic Symptom Disorder, Somatoform Disorders Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

DSM-5 Round up: March #1

March 19, 2013 by

DSM-5 Round up: March #1

Post #229 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2H2

New York Times

Letter to the Editor

RONALD PIES
Lexington, Mass., March 18, 2013

The writer is a professor of psychiatry at SUNY Upstate Medical University and Tufts University.

Letter
Invitation to a Dialogue: Psychiatric Diagnoses

Published: March 19, 2013

+++
Macleans Canada

Normal behaviour, or mental illness?

Temper tantrum, or ‘disruptive mood dysregulation disorder’? A look at the new psychiatric guidelines that are pitting doctors against doctors

Anne Kingston | Tuesday, March 19, 2013

…Under the new “somatic symptom disorder” (SSD), for instance, people who express any anxiety about physical symptoms could also be saddled with a mental illness diagnosis, which could thwart their attempts to have their physical issues taken seriously. To meet the definition one only needs to report a single bodily symptom that’s distressing and/or disruptive to daily life and have just one of the following three reactions for at least six months: “ ‘disproportionate’ thoughts about the seriousness of their symptom(s); a high level of anxiety about their health; devoting excessive time and energy to symptoms or health concerns.”

Read more of this post

Filed under Allen Frances, American Psychiatric Association (APA), Bereavement, Criticism of DSM-V, DSM-5, David Kupfer, DSM revision process, DSM-5, DSM-5 draft proposals, DSM-5 field trials, DSM-5 in the media, Somatic Symptom Disorder, Somatoform Disorders Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

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

March 5, 2013 by

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

Filed under Allen Frances, American Psychiatric Association (APA), Criticism of DSM-V, DSM-5, DSM revision process, DSM-5, DSM-5 draft proposals, DSM-5 field trials, DSM-5 in the media, Somatic Symptom Disorder, Somatoform Disorders Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

DSM-5 and ICD-10-CM Round up: February #3

February 28, 2013 by

DSM-5 and ICD-10-CM Round up: February #3

Post #227 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2FY

Updates:

American Psychiatric Association News release:

Release No. 13-11: February 28, 2013

APA Annual Meeting in San Francisco, May 18-22; DSM-5 to be Released

ARLINGTON, Va. (Feb. 28, 2013) – The American Psychiatric Association’s 166th Annual Meeting, the world’s largest psychiatric meeting, will run Saturday, May 18 to Wednesday, May 22, 2013 in San Francisco at the Moscone Convention Center. The much anticipated DSM-5, the latest revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, will be released at the meeting…

Clinical Psychiatry News Digital Network

DSM-5 expected to be more ‘user-friendly’

Doug Brunk | March 3, 2013

ABC News Radio

An edited version of the ABC News coverage of concerns for new DSM-5 disorder ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ that replaces four DSM-IV Somatoform Disorder categories has been published on ABC News Radio:

Guidelines for Diagnosing Psychiatric Disorder May Overlook Physical Illnesses

CMS pledges commitment to October 1, 2014 ICD-10-CM compliance:

Click link for PDF document   CMS letter

CMS: No Further Delays in ICD-10-CM/PCS Implementation

Chris Dimick | AHIMA & ICD-10 | February 27, 2013

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) will maintain their commitment to the current ICD-10-CM/PCS compliance date of October 1, 2014, according to a letter sent to AHIMA President Kathleen A. Frawley.

The letter was sent in response to AHIMA’s call for CMS to stand firm on its ICD-10 implementation date after more than 80 physician groups represented by the American Medical Association called on CMS in January to delay or abandon the ICD-10 conversion…

Susan Donaldson James reports for ABC News on DSM-5‘s ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’:

Contributions from Allen Frances, MD, Joel E Dimsdale, MD (Chair, DSM-5 Somatic Symptom Disorder Work Group), Lori Chapo-Kroger (P.A.N.D.O.R.A), Suzy Chapman (Dx Revision Watch), Bridget Mildon (FND Hope) and Marianne Russo (The Coffee Klatch)

ABC News

New Psych Disorder Could Mislabel Sick as Mentally Ill

Susan Donaldson James | February 27, 2013

Critics worry that patients will be misdiagnosed as mentally ill and won’t get treatment, affecting mostly those with chronic and difficult to diagnose neurological disorders and multi-system diseases like ME/CFS, ones that are poorly understood and can take years to get medical answers.

“A lot of people will be written off as crocks — it’s just in their head,” said Dr. Allen Frances, who was chair of the task force that created the DSM-4 and professor emeritus of psychiatry at Duke University. “They won’t get the medical work-up they need.”

…But [SSD work group chair] Dimsdale defends the updated DSM…”If it doesn’t work, we’ll fix it in the DSM-5.1 or DSM-6.”

Robert Sibley, senior writer for Ottawa Citizen, comments on DSM-5‘s ”Somatic Symptom Disorder’:

Ottowa Citizen (and  a number of syndications)

Column: Is life itself a sickness in need of a cure?

Robert Sibley | February 20, 2013

…In a recent article, Postmedia’s Sharon Kirkey quotes a statement from the American Psychiatric Association, which will publish a new edition of the DSM in May: “Some patients with illnesses like heart disease or cancer will indeed experience thoughts, feelings or behaviours related to their illness that will be extreme or overwhelming.” These individuals “may qualify for an SSD diagnosis…”

Results of recent American Psychiatric Association Trustee elections:

Helio

APA releases election results

February 25, 2013

DSM-5 (published by American Psychiatric Publishing Inc.) is planned for release at the APA’s 166th Annual Meeting, in San Francisco (May 18-22).

Psychiatric News | February 15, 2013
Volume 48 Number 4 page 21-21
10.1176/appi.pn.2013.2b24

American Psychiatric Association
Annual Meeting Highlights

Sessions Will Provide In-Depth Look at New DSM

Kuhl Emily, Ph.D.

Sidney Zizook, M.D., who served as an advisor to the DSM-5′s Mood Disorder Work Group, defends the removal of the DSM ‘bereavement exclusion’:

Scientific American

Getting Past the Grief over Grief

Sidney Zisook | February 25, 2013

These days, I get a lot of grief about grief. I am part of the work group that changed some of the ways that grief and clinical depression are described and differentiated in the new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, typically referred to as DSM-5. That has led to a lot of conversations with colleagues who are upset about bereavement…

Kupfer DJ, Regier DA, et al in JAMA ONLINE FIRST

JAMA ONLINE FIRST

DSM-5—The Future Arrived FREE ONLINE FIRST

David J. Kupfer, MD; Emily A. Kuhl, PhD; Darrel A. Regier, MD, MPH

Author Affiliations: University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (Dr Kupfer); and American Psychiatric Institute for Research and Education, Division of Research, American Psychiatric Association, Arlington, Virginia (Drs Kuhl and Regier).

JAMA. 2013;():1-2. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.2298.
Published online February 25, 2013

Jerome C. Wakefield, PhD, DSW, for Psychiatry Weekly, on the DSM ‘bereavement exclusion’ issue:

Remember the Bereavement Exclusion

Psychiatric Weekly

Jerome C. Wakefield, PhD, DSW | February 18, 2013

School of Social Work, Department of Psychiatry; New York University, NY

First published in Psychiatry Weekly, Volume 8, Issue 4, February 18, 2013

Filed under American Psychiatric Association (APA), Bereavement, CMS, Criticism of DSM-V, DSM-5, DSM revision process, DSM-5, DSM-5 in the media, ICD-10-CM compliance, Myalgic encephalomyelitis, Somatic Symptom Disorder, Somatoform Disorders Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →