4.2 Review

A review of psychological dysfunction in asthma: affective, behavioral and cognitive factors

Journal

JOURNAL OF ASTHMA
Volume 50, Issue 9, Pages 915-921

Publisher

INFORMA HEALTHCARE
DOI: 10.3109/02770903.2013.819887

Keywords

Anxiety; beliefs; breathing behaviors; depression; health behaviors; knowledge

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The research on psychological dysfunction in asthma is extensive but heterogeneous. We undertook a narrative review about the effects of psychological dysfunction on asthma. Methods: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were conducted, supplemented by hand-searching bibliographies and seeking expert opinion. Results: The impact of psychological factors on asthma can be classified according to dysfunction in the domains of affect, behavior and cognition. Affective or emotional disturbance may lead to poor asthma control by directly modulating disease activity. Maladaptive behaviors may occur in asthma patients. These include maladaptive breathing behaviors, such as impaired voluntary drive to breathe and dysfunctional breathing, as well as impaired asthma health behaviors, that is, a coordinated range of activities performed to maintain good disease control. Dysfunctional cognitions (thoughts and beliefs) about asthma and impaired cognitive processing of the perception of dyspnea are associated with poorly controlled disease and asthma deaths, respectively. The three domains of psychological dysfunction are often closely intertwined, leading to vicious circles. Conclusions: We have conceptualized psychological dysfunction in asthma using a framework consisting of affect, behavior and cognition. Their influences are intertwined and complex. Future research should focus on the formulation of a psychological assessment tool based on this framework and evaluating its efficacy in improving asthma outcomes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available