[MUS] and experiences with healthcare among emerging adults exposed to multiple types of potentially traumatic events 2024 Owens et al

Full title: Medically unexplained symptoms and experiences with healthcare among emerging adults exposed to multiple types of potentially traumatic events

Abstract

Experiencing multiple types of traumatic events can increase the risk of developing somatic and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS). Medically unexplained symptoms (MUS), or somatic symptoms that lack a distinct medical explanation, often coexist with PTSS in emerging adults and may be due to common underlying mechanisms. Coping strategies have been associated with PTSS, but have not been studied in trauma-exposed individuals with MUS.

The current study examined the relationship between the number of types of potentially traumatic events experienced and MUS among emerging adults, considering the influence of PTSS and engagement and disengagement coping. A sample of 363 emerging adults (Mean = 18.91) completed self-report measures of trauma history, PTSS, MUS, experiences with healthcare providers, and coping strategies. Dissatisfaction with healthcare providers was reported by 11.3% of participants reporting MUS, with over half (52.8%) feeling their concerns were dismissed. Hierarchical linear regression showed that the number of types of traumatic events experienced did not predict MUS after accounting for PTSS. Moderation hypotheses linking traumatic events and coping strategies were not supported.

Results suggest that PTSS explains the relationship between exposure to different traumatic events and MUS. Findings may have diagnostic and treatment implications for healthcare providers working with emerging adults who have experienced trauma.

Open access, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0310335

 

Introduction

1]. MUS are often attributed to functional somatic syndromes like fibromyalgia, chronic widespread pain, chronic fatigue syndrome, temporomandibular disorder, and irritable bowel syndrome, which are all characterized by symptoms without discernible biological or physical causes and lacking consensus on diagnostic criteria [2]. These syndromes share both somatic (e.g., pain, fatigue) and psychological symptoms (e.g., anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress) [3,4]. Given the increased risk of psychiatric disorders during emerging adulthood, exploring the interplay between psychopathology and somatic concerns which are prevalent in college students is imperative [5,6].

 

If you break your leg then how it was broken normally isn’t the main lead to how to fix the leg ie treatment

same for any other illness. Treating ptsd doesn’t negate the infection needing antibiotics

and that’s IF the correlation is the way they inferred - it’s pretty likely ending up with terrible illness that then gets refused to be investigated and bunged under MUS is going to cause more trauma the worse it is - cos you are too ill to work have no help with forms but can’t speak or travel and are being psychologised. A living nightmare in itself.

so you have to be really deep in the belief MUS isn’t an injury or disease and over confident that PYSD therapy (which is supposed to start with making the situation safe and less precarious as per psychology not just do therapy in the war zone going out as a soldier still ) is super effective to the extent it now fixes physical injury. that you refuse to investigate so don’t really know what it is to measure it.

my question to any positive results on these is were they checking physical function long term ie the illness or coercing subjective replies short term from people already traumatised and not in a position to displease lest perceived threats?

 

This is very circular and generic. Also lacking in any kind of validity whatsoever.

For all the concerns about the potential of AI flooding academia with BS, there's a blatant lack of focus on the fact that some disciplines are already nothing but a flood of human-generated nonsense. It seems that there is a type of research that has been perfected to be both fully optimized for academic success while at the same time being so thoroughly useless and meandering that probably no more than a dozen people will ever read it, and so pass completely unnoticed aside from padding a publication résumé.

And the above is frankly ridiculously suspicious.

 

So this is research done on people who are well and definitely not ill with any of the things this is supposed to inform

how insulting

but how stupid - is this about their ‘preventative medicine’ crud saying … well in well people they found if they were traumatised less they had less almost symptoms of something as a larger category we dump all of you that have something into to avoid actually even investigating so we don’t treat

and based on what they say they’ll what? Actually think they can extrapolate that to people who are not only ill but barred from having it looked at so not just no treatment but abuse and stresss lumped in them to make it worse

and so weird to be able to give credit for a course for participation, so yes extra incentive for a bit of imagining of fibbing to please.