Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Organization of Psychosomatic Service in Health Systems: The German Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Person Centered Approach to Recovery in Medicine

Part of the book series: Integrating Psychiatry and Primary Care ((IPPC))

Abstract

Psychosomatic Medicine in Germany is either practiced as an integrated approach in mainly internal medicine or specifically focusses on psychotherapeutic methods. There are stepped levels of training for doctors ranging from basic care as a GP to specialist degrees. Patients are treated in inpatient and day-patient facilities with usually interprofessional multi-modal therapy programs. Additionally there are rehabilitation centers particularly focusing on work-related aspects of disability prevention. Usually, hospitals also host a strong psychosomatic outpatient sector and consultation-liaison service including specific care e.g. in psycho-oncology or transplant psychosomatics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Fava GA, Belaise C, Sonino N. Psychosomatic medicine is a comprehensive field, not a synonym for consultation liaison psychiatry. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2010;12:215–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Deter HC. Psychosomatic medicine and psychotherapy: on the historical development of a special field in Germany. Adv Psychosom Med. 2004;26:181–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. von Uexküll Thure WW. Integrierte Medizin als Gesamtkonzept der Heilkunde: Ein bio-psycho-soziales Modell. In: Adler RWH, Joraschky P, Köhle K, Langewitz W, Söllner W, Wesiak W, editors. Psychosomatische Medizin: Theoretische Modelle und klinische Praxis, vol. 7. München: Elsevier GmbH; 2011. p. 3–40.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung. 2014. http://www.kbv.de/html/. Accessed 6 Oct 2017.

  5. Bundesärztekammer. 2014. http://www.bundesaerztekammer.de/weitere-sprachen/english/german-medical-association/. Accessed 6 Oct 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Zipfel S, Giel KE, Bulik CM, Hay P, Schmidt U. Anorexia nervosa: aetiology, assessment, and treatment. Lancet Psychiatry. 2015;2:1099–111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zipfel S, Herzog W, Kruse J, Henningsen P. Psychosomatic medicine in Germany: more timely than ever. Psychother Psychosom. 2016;85:262–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Linden M. Psychosomatic inpatient rehabilitation: the German model. Psychother Psychosom. 2014;83:205–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Probst T, von Heymann F, Zaudig M, Konermann J, Lahmann C, Loew T, et al. The effectiveness of psychosomatic inpatient treatment—results of a multicentre follow-up study. Z Psychosom Med Psychother. 2009;55:409–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Liebherz S, Rabung S. Do patients’ symptoms and interpersonal problems improve in psychotherapeutic hospital treatment in Germany? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9:e105329.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Dinger U, Klipsch O, Kohling J, Ehrenthal JC, Nikendei C, Herzog W, et al. Day-clinic and inpatient psychotherapy for depression (dip-d): a randomized controlled pilot study in routine clinical care. Psychother Psychosom. 2014;83:194–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Zeeck A, von Wietersheim J, Weiss H, Eduard Scheidt C, Volker A, Helesic A, et al. Symptom course in inpatient and day clinic treatment of depression: results from the INDDEP-study. J Affect Disord. 2015;187:35–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bundespsychotherapeutenkammer. 2016. http://www.bptk.de/. Accessed 6 Oct 2017.

  14. Herzog W, Beutel M, Kruse J. Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychotherapie heute—zur Lage des Fachgebietes in Deutschland. Stuttgart: Schattauer; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Billings EG. Liaison psychiatry and intern instruction. J Assoc Am Med Coll. 1939;14:375–85.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Diefenbacher AC. Psychiatry and psychosomatic medicine in Germany: lessons to be learned. Austr N Zeal J Psychiatry. 2005;39:782–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Laner B, Staufer C, Giesinger JM, Gross R, Kohl C, Malik P, et al. Psychiatric consultation-liaison interventions: recollection, perception and outcome. J Psychosom Res. 2013;75:184–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2013.06.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wood R, Wand AP. The effectiveness of consultation-liaison psychiatry in the general hospital setting: a systematic review. J Psychosom Res. 2014;76:175–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2014.01.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Leentjens AF, Rundell JR, Wolcott DL, Diefenbacher A, Kathol R, Guthrie E. Psychosomatic medicine and consultation-liaison psychiatry: scope of practice, processes, and competencies for psychiatrists or psychosomatic medicine specialists. A consensus statement of the European Association of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry and the Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine. Psychosomatics. 2011;52:19–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Frank JR, Danoff D. The CanMEDS initiative: implementing an outcomes-based framework of physician competencies. Med Teach. 2007;29:642–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Söllner W, Creed F, European Association of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry and Psychosomatics Workgroup on Training in Consultation-Liaison. European guidelines for training in consultation-liaison psychiatry and psychosomatics: report of the EACLPP workgroup on training in consultation-liaison psychiatry and psychosomatics. J Psychosom Res. 2007;62:501–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. O’Dowd MA, Gomez MF. Psychotherapy in consultation-liaison psychiatry. Am J Psychother. 2001;55:122–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Olbrisch ME, Benedict SM, Ashe K, Levenson JL. Psychological assessment and care of organ transplant patients. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2002;70:771–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Jowsey SG, Schneekloth TD. Psychosocial factors in living organ donation: clinical and ethical challenges. Transplant Rev (Orlando). 2008;22:192–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trre.2008.04.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Järvholm S, Johannesson L, Clarke A, Brännström M. Uterus transplantation trial: psychological evaluation of recipients and partners during the post-transplantation year. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:1010–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.06.038.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Erim Y, Beckmann M, Valentin-Gamazo C, Malago M, Frilling A, Schlaak J, et al. Selection of donors for adult living-donor liver donation: results of the assessment of the first 205 donor candidates. Psychosomatics. 2008;49:143–51. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psy.49.2.143.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Potts M, Evans DW. Is solid organ donation by living donors ethical? The case of kidney donation. In: Weimar W, Bos MA, Busschbach JJ, editors. Organ transplantation: ethical, legal and psychosocial aspects. Towards a common European policy. Lengerich: Pabst Sci Publ; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ladwig KH, Lederbogen F, Albus C, et al. Position paper on the importance of psychosocial factors in cardiology: update 2013. Ger Med Sci. 2014;12:Doc09. https://doi.org/10.3205/000194.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Rozanski A, Blumenthal JA, Davidson KW, et al. The epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management of psychosocial risk factors in cardiac practice: the emerging field of behavioral cardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45:637–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Albus C, Ladwig KH, Herrmann-Lingen C. Psychocardiology. Clinically relevant recommendations regarding selected cardiovascular diseases. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2014;139:596–601.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Rutledge T, Redwine LS, Linke SE, et al. A meta-analysis of mental health treatments and cardiac rehabilitation for improving clinical outcomes and depression among patients with coronary heart disease. Psychosom Med. 2013;75:335–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Whalley B, Rees K, Davies P. Psychological interventions for coronary heart disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; CD002902.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Grover S, Kate N. Somatic symptoms in consultation-liaison psychiatry. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2013;25:52–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Elman I, Zubieta JK, Borsook D. The missing p in psychiatric training: why it is important to teach pain to psychiatrists. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011;68(1):12–20. https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010;174.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Voon P, Karamouzian M, Kerr T. Chronic pain and opioid misuse: a review of reviews. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2017;12:36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-017-0120-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Turk DC. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of treatments for patients with chronic pain. Clin J Pain. 2002;18:355–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Zeeberg P, Olesen J, Jensen R. Efficacy of multidisciplinary treatment in a tertiary referral headache centre. Cephalalgia. 2005;25:1159–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Hospital, Tuebingen, Germany

    Stephan Zipfel, Anne Herrmann-Werner & Florian Junne

Authors
  1. Stephan Zipfel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anne Herrmann-Werner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Florian Junne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephan Zipfel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Psychiatry, Department of Biomedical and Specialty Surgical Sciences, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy

    Luigi Grassi

  2. University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Michelle B. Riba

  3. Inova Fairfax Hospital, Johns Hopkins University Inova Fairfax Hospital, Falls Church, VA, USA

    Thomas Wise

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Zipfel, S., Herrmann-Werner, A., Junne, F. (2019). Organization of Psychosomatic Service in Health Systems: The German Perspective. In: Grassi, L., Riba, M., Wise, T. (eds) Person Centered Approach to Recovery in Medicine. Integrating Psychiatry and Primary Care. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74736-1_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74736-1_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74735-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-74736-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation