The vicious cycle of functional neurological disorders: a synthesis of healthcare professionals’ views on working with patients with functional neurological disorder
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The objective of this review was to synthesise studies which address the views of healthcare professionals (HCPs) towards patients with functional neurological disorder (FND). An interpretive systematised review was conducted. Seven databases were searched using a comprehensive search strategy (MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PsychINFO, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health, and Scopus). Qualitative studies and those using survey methods were included. An inductive approach to thematic analysis was used to identify concepts from the data and to synthesise the results. The views of 2769 HCPs were represented in 11 included articles. The overarching theme across the articles was uncertainty: about making the diagnosis of FND, about professional roles, and about optimum management. Fear was also a common theme: of saying the wrong thing, of offending patients, or of breaking the therapeutic relationship. If all HCPs felt uncertain about how to manage patients with FND and avoided them by passing them on to another discipline, then a “vicious cycle” is formed in which patients are passed from one professional to another but without receiving clear, honest information, or effective treatment. HCPs would benefit from increased training on FND and clear clinical pathways to alleviate feelings of uncertainty.Implications for rehabilitationEvidence-based or, at the very least, consensus-based multi-disciplinary care pathways for the assessment and treatment of patients with functional neurological disorder are required to improve equitability of services.Training packages for healthcare professionals need to be developed, evaluated and implemented in order to improve confidence of making and explaining the diagnosis and to reduce stigma of functional neurological disorders.Improved input for patients with functional neurological disorder is likely to occur if healthcare professionals are open, honest and use effective communication skills, both with their patients and fellow healthcare professionals. Evidence-based or, at the very least, consensus-based multi-disciplinary care pathways for the assessment and treatment of patients with functional neurological disorder are required to improve equitability of services. Training packages for healthcare professionals need to be developed, evaluated and implemented in order to improve confidence of making and explaining the diagnosis and to reduce stigma of functional neurological disorders. Improved input for patients with functional neurological disorder is likely to occur if healthcare professionals are open, honest and use effective communication skills, both with their patients and fellow healthcare professionals.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,032 | 0,080 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,012 | 0,011 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».