Advertisement

Liaison is as Liaison Does

  • Chase Patterson Kimball

Abstract

The term Liaison has a number of connotations.1–4 For the purposes of this discussion it means the relationship between individuals, disciplines, events, and illness. It includes a body of research generative of empirical data that identifies and explores these relationships. Its disciplinary derivatives are biological, psychological, and social, including sub-disciplines within these, especially behavioral science, anthropology, and neuroendocrinology. Most recently, ethics has become an important component of the interests and work of the Liaison physicians.5 Liaison expands its parental derivation from psychosomatic medicine, resting for the moment on the term, Biopsychosocial.6 Liaison identifies process knowledge, as well as a substantive body of knowledge derivative of its research studies. The process of liaison stresses includes methods of obtaining information and the application of its use. Interview technique is fundamental to this process.7 Liaison is between people, beginning with the patient-doctor relationship. It is also between patients and nurses, doctors and doctors, and the medical profession and other institutions of society. Thus, Liaison is incorporative of many disciplinary relationships in its attempt to facilitate a definition of the illness experience.

Keywords

Acute Myocardial Infarction Psychosomatic Medicine Coronary Care Unit Illness Experience Liaison Psychiatry 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. J. Krakowski, Liaison psychiatry in North America in the 1970’s, in: “The Teaching of Psychosomatic Medicine and Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry,” C. P. Kimball and A. J. Krakowski, eds., Bibliotheca Psychiatrica, No. 159, S. Karger, Basel (1979), p. 4–15.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. H. Greenhill, Teaching and training of the psychosomatic approach, in: “The Teaching of Psychosomatic Medicine and Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry,” C. P. Kimball and A. J. Krakowski, eds., Bibliotheca Psychiatrica, No. 159, S. Karger, Basel (1979), p. 15–23.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Grossman and J. J. Strain, “Psychological Care of the Medically Ill: A Primer in Liaison Psychiatry,” Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York (1975).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. J. Strain, “Psychological Interventions in Medical Practice,” Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York (1978).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    C. P. Kimball, The issue of confidentiality in the consultation-liaison process, in: “The Teaching of Psychosomatic Medicine and Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry,” C. P. Kimball and A. J. Krakowski, eds., Bibliotheca Psychiatrica, No. 159, S. Karger, Basel (1979), p. 82–90.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    G. L. Engel, The clinical application of the biopsychosocial model, Amer. Jour. Psychiat. 137: 535–544 (1980).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    C. P. Kimball, On approaches: interviewing, in: The Bio- psychosocial Approach to the Patient,“ Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore (1981), p. 3–9.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    C. P. Kimball, Thinking about patients, in: “Symposium on Liaison Psychiatry,” Psych. Clin. No. Amer., Vol. 2, No. 2, W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia (1979), p. 191–201.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. P. Kimball, Liaison psychiatry: of approaches and ways of thinking about behavior, in: “Symposium on Liaison Psychiatry,” C. P. Kimball (ed.), Psych. Clin. No. Amer., Vol. 2, No. 2, W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia (1979), p. 201–211.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C. P. Kimball, Reactions to illness: the acute phase: the interplay of environmental factors in intensive care units, in: “Symposium on Liaison Psychiatry, ” C. P. Kimball (ed.), Psych. Clin. No. Amer., Vol. 2, No. 2, W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia (1979), p. 307–321.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. H. Schmale, Reactions to illness: convalescence and grieving, in: “Symposium on Liaison Psychiatry,” C. P. Kimball (ed.), Psych. Clin. No. Amer., Vol. 2, No. 2, W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia (1979), p. 321–331.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    N. R. Bernstein, Chronic illness and impairment, in: “Symposium on Liaison Psychiatry,” C. P. Kimball (ed.), Psych. Clin. No. Amer., Vol. 2, No. 2, W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia (1979), p. 331–347.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. S. Olin, and T. P. Hackett, The denial of chest pain in 32 patients with acute myocardial infarction, Jour. Amer. Med. Assoc. 190: 977–981 (1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    G. L. Engel and J. Romano, Delirium, a syndrome of cerebral insufficiency, Jour. Chron. Dis. 9: 260–277 (1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    E. Lindemann, Symptomatology and management of acute grief, Amer. Jour. Psychiat. 101: 141–148 (1944).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    R. Klein, Behavioral patterns and catecholamine excretion in acute myocardial infarction, Psychosom. Med. 31: 449–450 (1969).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Friedman and R. H. Rsenman, Association of specific overt behavior pattern with blood and cardiovascular findings, Jour. Amer. Med. Assoc. 169: 1286–1296 (1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. C. Nemiah and P. E. Sifneos, Affect and fantasy in patients with psychosomatic disorders, in: “Modern Trends in Psychosomatic Medicine,” O. W. Hill (ed.), Chapter 2, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York (1970).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chase Patterson Kimball
    • 1
  1. 1.The University of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations