| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Psychiatric Bulletin | Advances in Psychiatric Treatment | All RCPsych Journals |
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Correspondence |
South London and Maudsley NHS Trust, Norwood CMHT, 19–21 Knights Hill, London SE27 0HS, UK
Health Service Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
We read with interest the historical overview on dhat syndrome by Sumathipala et al (2004). We agree with the authors' contention that categorising it as a culture-bound syndrome is not likely to advance research. The authors examine the nosological significance of this disorder and suggest the possibility of culturally influenced somatoform disorder, although they do not offer a detailed model. In the spirit of Sumathipala et al's conclusion that there are no absolute truths when it comes to classificatory systems, we propose the following formulation.
Fatigue is a common symptom in dhat syndrome (Bhatia & Malik, 1991). Disorders with fatigue as the main symptom are often grouped together as functional somatic syndromes (Barsky & Borus, 1999). The basic cognitive formulation offered to explain these disorders is based on somatosensory amplification, misattribution and abnormal illness behaviour. We have incorporated societal and cultural factors along the lines of the socio-somatic model (Kirmayer & Young, 1998) to explain dhat syndrome as a functional somatic syndrome.
In cultures where open discussion about sexual issues is taboo and fears about masturbation exist, the urogenital system is likely to be the focus of preoccupation. Under stress, persons predisposed to amplification of somatic symptoms and health anxiety may focus attention on physiological changes such as turbidity of urine and tiredness, and misattribute them to loss of semen in the light of widely prevalent health beliefs. These beliefs may then be confirmed by friends and other lay sources as well as by local practitioners subscribing to similar models.
We have recently completed a study showing significantly higher scores on measures of amplification, hypochondriacal beliefs and abnormal illness behaviour in patients with dhat syndrome compared with medical controls. The above model needs to be examined further in both quantitative and qualitative studies. The practical implication of this formulation is that it suggests a viable treatment model based on psychoeducation and culturally informed cognitive–behavioural therapy, which has been demonstrated to be feasible in the Indian subcontinent (Sumathipala et al, 2000).
REFERENCES
Barsky, A. J. & Borus, J. F. (1999)
Functional somatic syndromes. Annals of Internal
Medicine, 130, 910
-921.
Bhatia, M. S. & Malik, S. C. (1991)
Dhat syndrome – a useful diagnostic entity in Indian culture.
British Journal of Psychiatry,
159, 691
-695.
Kirmayer, L. J. & Young, A. (1998) Culture
and somatization: clinical, epidemiological, and ethnographic perspectives.
Psychosomatic Medicine,
60, 420
-430.
Sumathipala, A., Hewege, S., Hanwella, R., et al (2000) Randomized controlled trial of cognitive behaviour therapy for repeated consultations for medically unexplained complaints: a feasibility study in Sri Lanka. Psychological Medicine, 60, 420 -430.
Sumathipala, A., Siribaddana, S. H. & Bhugra, D.
(2004) Culture-bound syndromes: the story of dhat
syndrome. British Journal of Psychiatry,
184, 200
-209.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Psychiatric Bulletin | Advances in Psychiatric Treatment | All RCPsych Journals |
