Psychiatric Symptoms as the First or Solitary Manifestation of Somatic Illnesses: Hyperammonaemia Type II, 2020, Niwinski et al

Discussion in 'Other health news and research' started by Andy, Jul 21, 2020.

  1. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    22,422
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    Paywall, https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/508679
    Sci hub, https://sci-hub.tw/10.1159/000508679
     
    MEMarge, EzzieD, ukxmrv and 16 others like this.
  2. Joan Crawford

    Joan Crawford Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    630
    Location:
    Warton, Carnforth, Lancs, UK
    MEMarge, ukxmrv, merylg and 3 others like this.
  3. Sid

    Sid Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,116
    Good stuff. Quite a few metabolic disorders can present as psychiatric, at least initially.
     
    MEMarge, Joan Crawford, Trish and 3 others like this.
  4. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,616
    Location:
    Australia
    And neurological disorders/brain tumours/strokes/heart disease. Etc.

    The functional disorders claim rest entirely on the assumption that there is no underlying biological pathology. How they test that to a safe level has yet to be explained.
     
    Mithriel, rvallee, MEMarge and 9 others like this.
  5. Joan Crawford

    Joan Crawford Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    630
    Location:
    Warton, Carnforth, Lancs, UK
    And how that fits with "First, do no harm" baffles me......

    At best poor quality, lazy communication can be to blame. As in: For example, a neurologist has a 'normal' neuro screen/examination and 'normal' MRI and concludes that there is nothing for him/her to do/act on - so states this and does it in a way that suggests - 'nothing is wrong' which is not the same as "I've done some tests, scans and assessment/examination and I cannot see a condition I can have further input into and helping clinically with". The patient can see / understand this very differently. Sometimes a lot of what goes on is missed/mixed communication. i.e. patients understandably want to find out/know what the heck is wrong with them. The Neurologist wants to ensure that they have not missed major neuro disease that they can treat/diagnose - i.e. take some positive action to help the patient. These two things are different. Expectations can and do clash all of the time. It is, in my view, up to the professional in the room to manage this - not the patient.

    At it's worst - and I've read the reports - it can amount to things like "As your scans, tests and examination were unremarkable, my view is that your symptoms are related to your anxiety and depression." Without checking out if this is helpful, useful or even remotely plausible to the patient or their GP. And not surprisingly patient can interpret this as character assassination and be less than pleased about it. Can cause avoidable psychological harm.
     
  6. Arnie Pye

    Arnie Pye Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,245
    Location:
    UK
    Well, I have always thought that "First do no harm" allows for doctors to do nothing. If they do nothing then they aren't causing harm. They aren't preventing harm either, but that never gets mentioned.
     
    rvallee and 2kidswithME like this.
  7. Joan Crawford

    Joan Crawford Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    630
    Location:
    Warton, Carnforth, Lancs, UK
    Doing nothing at times can be really detrimental and the opposite true too in other circumstances. I understand 'First, do no harm' in the context of: making the doctor stop and think before acting or not acting - depending on the context and situation. Both over and under 'doing' things could cause harm - including psychological harm - context is all.
     
    MEMarge, Arnie Pye and JemPD like this.
  8. Arnie Pye

    Arnie Pye Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,245
    Location:
    UK
    I agree 100%.
     
    MEMarge likes this.

Share This Page