Volume 10 -
MEJDS (2020) 10: 216 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Firoozehmoghadam S, Amin Yazdi A, Beheshti Namdar A, Bigdeli I. Comparing Neuroticism, Sensory Processing Sensitivity, Behavioral Inhibition, and Emotion Regulation Between Patients With Functional Dyspepsia and Healthy Individuals. MEJDS 2020; 10 :216-216
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1484-en.html
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1484-en.html
1- Department of Psychology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
2- Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
3- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences
2- Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
3- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences
Abstract: (2022 Views)
Background & Objectives: Functional Dyspepsia (FD) is the most common disorder of the upper gastrointestinal tract. FD is characterized by chronic or recurrent gastrointestinal symptoms in the absence of any organic or metabolic diseases, i.e., likely to explain them. Although FD does not lead to death, it significantly reduces a patient's quality of life due to frequent clinical presentations, repeated medical visits, requiring healthcare services, and absenteeism from social settings. FD also imposes high costs on the healthcare system. Despite the existence of extensive empirical evidence to support the impact of psychological factors on FD, data on this issue are scarce. Thus, the current study aimed to compare neuroticism, Sensory Processing Sensitivity (SPS), Behavioral Inhibition (BI), and Emotion Regulation (ER) between patients with FD and a healthy group.
Methods: This comparative study was conducted in the summer and autumn of 2017 in Mashhad City, Iran. The statistical population of the study consisted of all patients who were referred to the gastroenterology clinic of the Ghaem Hospital where FD was definitively diagnosed by a gastroenterologist following laboratory tests data and endoscopic examination. The research sample consisted of 60 patients with FD who were selected using the convenience sampling method as well as 60 healthy adults who were matched for age, gender, and education with the test group. The inclusion criteria for the patient group of the study were as follows: receiving a definitive diagnosis of FD by a gastroenterologist after obtaining the laboratory tests results and conducting endoscopic examinations; the lack of organic diseases, like cancer and any gastric ulcers; a treatment history of helicobacter pylori infection and helicobacter pylori eradication therapy; literacy and awareness to complete the questionnaires; voluntary agreement to participate in the research; being adults aged 18–60 years; the lack of other serious physical illnesses, and the absence of major psychiatric disorders (as per the information obtained from the patient.( For the control group, the inclusion criteria included no FD, the absence of other serious physical illnesses, and no major psychiatric disorders )as per the data obtained from the participant) .In both research groups, the study participants completed the NEO–Five Factor Inventory (NEO–FFI) (Costa & McCrae, 1992), the Highly Sensitive Person Scale (HSPS; Aron & Aron, 1997), the Behavioral Activation And Inhibition Systems Scales (BAISS; Carver & White, 1994), and the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS; Gratz & Roemer 2004). The collected data were analyzed using SPSS by Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) and Independent Samples –test at the significance level of 0.05.
Results: The current research findings indicated a significant difference in neuroticism between the study groups (p<0.001). The experimental group’s neuroticism scores were significantly higher than those of the controls. Comparing the scores of HSPS (p<0.001) and its subscales, including the ease of excitation (p<0.001), aesthetic sensitivity (p<0.001), and low sensory threshold (p<0.001) suggested a significant difference between the study groups (p<0.001). There was a significant difference between the healthy and patient groups in ER (p<0.001) and all of its dimensions, including the non–acceptance of emotional responses (p<0.001), difficulties engaging in goal–directed behaviors (p<0.001), impulse control problems (p<0.001), the lack of emotional awareness (p<0.001), limited access to ER strategies (p<0.001), and the lack of emotional clarity (p=0.014). The results of comparing the research groups concerning BI also revealed a significant difference (p<0.001), where the experimental group’s mean score was significantly higher than that of the controls.
Conclusion: The present study results indicated that high neuroticism, SPS, and BI, as well as emotion dysregulation, can be psychological characteristics involved in FD. Identifying these factors and applying appropriate psychological techniques along with medical interventions can facilitate the process of treating this condition.
Methods: This comparative study was conducted in the summer and autumn of 2017 in Mashhad City, Iran. The statistical population of the study consisted of all patients who were referred to the gastroenterology clinic of the Ghaem Hospital where FD was definitively diagnosed by a gastroenterologist following laboratory tests data and endoscopic examination. The research sample consisted of 60 patients with FD who were selected using the convenience sampling method as well as 60 healthy adults who were matched for age, gender, and education with the test group. The inclusion criteria for the patient group of the study were as follows: receiving a definitive diagnosis of FD by a gastroenterologist after obtaining the laboratory tests results and conducting endoscopic examinations; the lack of organic diseases, like cancer and any gastric ulcers; a treatment history of helicobacter pylori infection and helicobacter pylori eradication therapy; literacy and awareness to complete the questionnaires; voluntary agreement to participate in the research; being adults aged 18–60 years; the lack of other serious physical illnesses, and the absence of major psychiatric disorders (as per the information obtained from the patient.( For the control group, the inclusion criteria included no FD, the absence of other serious physical illnesses, and no major psychiatric disorders )as per the data obtained from the participant) .In both research groups, the study participants completed the NEO–Five Factor Inventory (NEO–FFI) (Costa & McCrae, 1992), the Highly Sensitive Person Scale (HSPS; Aron & Aron, 1997), the Behavioral Activation And Inhibition Systems Scales (BAISS; Carver & White, 1994), and the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS; Gratz & Roemer 2004). The collected data were analyzed using SPSS by Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) and Independent Samples –test at the significance level of 0.05.
Results: The current research findings indicated a significant difference in neuroticism between the study groups (p<0.001). The experimental group’s neuroticism scores were significantly higher than those of the controls. Comparing the scores of HSPS (p<0.001) and its subscales, including the ease of excitation (p<0.001), aesthetic sensitivity (p<0.001), and low sensory threshold (p<0.001) suggested a significant difference between the study groups (p<0.001). There was a significant difference between the healthy and patient groups in ER (p<0.001) and all of its dimensions, including the non–acceptance of emotional responses (p<0.001), difficulties engaging in goal–directed behaviors (p<0.001), impulse control problems (p<0.001), the lack of emotional awareness (p<0.001), limited access to ER strategies (p<0.001), and the lack of emotional clarity (p=0.014). The results of comparing the research groups concerning BI also revealed a significant difference (p<0.001), where the experimental group’s mean score was significantly higher than that of the controls.
Conclusion: The present study results indicated that high neuroticism, SPS, and BI, as well as emotion dysregulation, can be psychological characteristics involved in FD. Identifying these factors and applying appropriate psychological techniques along with medical interventions can facilitate the process of treating this condition.
Keywords: Functional dyspepsia, Neuroticism, Sensory processing sensitivity, Behavioral inhibition, Emotion regulation.
Type of Study: Original Research Article |
Subject:
Psychology
References
1. Stanghellini V, Chan FKL, Hasler WL, Malagelada JR, Suzuki H, Tack J, et al. Gastroduodenal disorders. Gastroenterology. 2016;150(6):1380–92. [DOI]
2. Ford AC, Marwaha A, Sood R, Moayyedi P. Global prevalence of and risk factors for, uninvestigated dyspepsia: a meta-analysis. Gut. 2015;64:1049–57. [DOI]
3. Zagari RM, Law GR, Fuccio L, Cennamo V, Gilthorpe MS, Forman D, et al. Epidemiology of functional dyspepsia and subgroups in Italian general population: a endoscopic study. Gastroenterology. 2010;138(4):1302–11. [DOI]
4. Jones MP, Coppens E, Vos R, Holvoet L, Luyten P, Tack J, et al. A multidimensional model of psychobiological interactions in functional dyspepsia: a structural equation modelling approach. Gut. 2013;62(11):1573–80. [DOI]
5. Stanley J, Stuart AD, Pretorius HG. Irritable bowel syndrome: personality and health behaviors: a biopsychosocial approach. Health SA Gesondheid. 1999;4(1):10–18. [DOI]
6. Holtmann G, Kutscher S-U, Haag S, Langkafel M, Heuft G, Neufang-Hueber J, et al. Clinical presentation and personality factors are predictors of the response to treatment in patients with functional dyspepsia: a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled crossover study. Digestive Diseases and Sciences. 2004;49(4):672–9. [DOI]
7. Filipović BF, Randjelovic T, Ille T, Markovic O, Milovanović B, Kovacevic N, et al. Anxiety, personality traits and quality of life in functional dyspepsia‐suffering patients. European Journal of Internal Medicine. 2013;24(1):83–6. [DOI]
8. Faramarzi M, Kashiferd M, Shokri-Shirvani J. Comparison of some personality traits of patients with functional dyspepsia and healthy individuals. Journal of Babol University of Medical Sciences. 2013;15(4):57–62. [Persian] [Article]
9. Barlow DH, Ellard KK, Sauer-Zavala S, Bullis JR, Carl JR. The origins of neuroticism. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2014;9(5):481–96. [DOI]
10. Gratz KL, Roemer L. Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: development, factor structure, and initial validation of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2004;26:41-54. [DOI]
11. Dynes M. Neuroticism and emotion regulation success. [Thesis for MSc. In Psychology]. [Ohio, USA]: Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University; 2010.
12. Gable SL, Reis HT, Elliot AJ. Behavioral activation and inhibition in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000;78(6):1135–49. [DOI]
13. Motoi M, Egashira Y, Nishimura T, Choi D, Matsumoto R, Watanuki S. Time window for cognitive activity involved in emotional processing. J Physio Anthrop. 2014;33(1):21. [DOI]
14. Miller LJ, Lane SL. Toward a consensus in terminology in sensory integration theory and practice, part 1: taxonomy of neurophysiological processes. Sensory Integration Special Interest Section Quarterly. 2002;23(1):1–4.
15. Aron E. Psychotherapy and the highly sensitive person: improving outcomes for that minority of people who are the majority of clients. New York, NY: Routledge; 2010.276p.
16. Aron EN. Revisiting jung’s concept of innate sensitiveness. J Analytical Psychol. 2004;49(3):337–67. [DOI]
17. Aron EN, Aron A. Sensory-processing sensitivity and its relation to introversion and emotionality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1997;73(2):345–68. [DOI]
18. Ahadi B, Basharpoor S. Relationship between sensory processing sensitivity, personality dimensions and mental health. J of Applied Sciences. 2010;10(7):570–4. [Persian] [DOI]
19. Smolewska KA, McCabe SB, Woody EZ. A psychometric evaluation of the highly sensitive person scale: the components of sensory-processing sensitivity and their relation to the bis/bas and “big five”. Personality and Individual Differences. 2006;40(6):1269–79. [DOI]
20. Tabibzadeh SA, Bordbar G, Ghasemi S, Namazi S. Functional dyspepsia (FD); prevalence and relationship with psychological disorders among medical sciences students. Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Sciences. 2018;6(1):161–168. [DOI]
21. Aro P, Talley NJ, Johansson S-E, Agréus L, Ronkainen J. Anxiety is linked to new-onset dyspepsia in the Swedish population: a 10-year follow-up study. Gastroenterology. 2015;148(5):928–37. [DOI]
22. Asgari P, Pasha GHR, Aminiyan M. Relationship between emotion regulation, mental stresses and body image with eating disorders of women. Journal of Clinical Psychology Andisheh va Raftar. 2009;4(13):65–78. [Persian]
23. Carver CS, White TL. Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: the bis/bas scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1994;67(2):319–33. [DOI]
24. Abdollahi R, Bakhshipour R, Mahmoodaliloo M. Validity and reliability of behavioral inhibition and activation systems (BIS/BAS) scales among Tabriz University Students. Journal of Modern Psychological Researches. 2013;7(28):123–39. [Persian] [Article]
25. Costa PT, McCrae RR. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and the Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1992. pp. 53–65.
26. Garousi MT, Mehryar AH, Ghazi Tabatabaei M. Application of the NEOP I-R test and analytic evaluation of its characteristics and factorial structure among Iranian university students. Journal of Humanities. 2001;11(39):173–98. [Persian]
27. Friedman HS. The multiple linkages of personality and disease. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity. 2008;22(5):668–75. [DOI]
28. Dalgleish T. The emotional brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2004;5(7):583–9. [DOI]
29. Geeraerts B, Vandenberghe J, Van Oudenhove L, Gregory LJ, Aziz Q, DuPont P, et al. Influence of experimentally induced anxiety on gastric sensorimotor function in humans. Gastroenterology. 2005;129(5):1437–44. [DOI]
30. Van Oudenhove L, Vandenberghe J, Geeraerts B, Vos R, Persoons P, Demyttenaere K, et al. Relationship between anxiety and gastric sensorimotor function in functional dyspepsia: Psychosomatic Medicine. 2007;69(5):455–63. [DOI]
31. Taché Y, Martinez V, Million M, Wang L. III. Stress-related alterations of gut motor function: role of brain corticotropin-releasing factor receptors. American Journal of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology. 2001;280(2):173–7. [DOI]
32. Taché Y, Bonaz B. Corticotropin-releasing factor receptors and stress-related alterations of gut motor function. J Clin Invest. 2007;117(1):33–40. [DOI]
33. Ehlert U, Nater UM, Bohmelt A. High and low unstimulated salivary cortisol levels correspond to different symptoms of functional gastrointestinal disorders. Journal of Psychosomatic Research. 2005;59(1):7–10. [DOI]
34. Shadkam MS, Azad Fallah P, Khedmat H. Comparison of brain/behavioral systems activity in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease and healthy people. Journal of Behavioral Sciences. 2010;4(2):83–89. [Persian]
35. Jones MP. The role of psychosocial factors in peptic ulcer disease: beyond helicobacter pylori and NSAIDS. Journal of Psychosomatic Research. 2006;60(4):407–12. [DOI]
36. Abernethy H. The assessment and treatment of sensory defensiveness in adult mental health: a literature review. British Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2010;73(5):210–8. [DOI]
37. Benham G. The highly sensitive person: stress and physical symptom reports. Personality and Individual Differences. 2006;40(7):1433–40. [DOI]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
