4.5 Article

A cognitive model of menopausal hot flushes and night sweats

期刊

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOSOMATIC RESEARCH
卷 69, 期 5, 页码 491-501

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.04.005

关键词

Menopause; Hot flushes; Symptom perception; Beliefs; Sternal skin conductance; Cognitive behavioral therapy

资金

  1. NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health, South London
  2. Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
  3. Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London
  4. Cancer Research UK [C8670/A10847]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hot flushes and night sweats (HF/NS) are commonly experienced by. mid-aged women during the menopause transition. They affect approximately 70% of women but are regarded as problematic for 15-20% largely due to physical discomfort, distress, social embarrassment, and sleep disturbance. There is a need for effective and acceptable nonmedical treatments for menopausal symptoms due to the declining use of hormone therapy (HT) following publication of the Women's Health Initiative and other prospective studies which associated HT use with increased risk of stroke and breast cancer. HF/NS are an example of a physiological process embedded within, and moderated by, psychological processes, as evidenced by discrepancies between subjective experiences and physiologically measured symptoms. We describe a cognitive model of menopausal hot flushes that can explain symptom perception, cognitive appraisal, and behavioral reactions to symptoms. Theoretically, the model draws on symptom perception theory, self-regulation theory, and cognitive behavioral theories. The model can be used to identify the variables to target in psychological interventions for HF/NS and to aid understanding of possible mediating factors. As part of Phase 11 intervention development, we describe a cognitive behavioral treatment which links the bio-psycho-social processes specified in the model to components of the intervention. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据