A Practical and Evidence-Based Approach to Common Symptoms: A Narrative Review
Submit a Comment
Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest. Comments are moderated. Please see our information for authorsregarding comments on an Annals publication.
Abstract
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Comments
Sign In to Submit A CommentInformation & Authors
Information
Published In

History
Keywords
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. For an editable text file, please select Medlars format which will download as a .txt file. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.
A Practical and Evidence-Based Approach to Common Symptoms: A Narrative Review. Ann Intern Med.2014;161:579-586. [Epub 21 October 2014]. doi:10.7326/M14-0461
View More
Login Options:
Purchase
You will be redirected to acponline.org to sign-in to Annals to complete your purchase.
Access to EPUBs and PDFs for FREE Annals content requires users to be registered and logged in. A subscription is not required. You can create a free account below or from the following link. You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals. If you are accessing the Free Annals content via your institution's access, registration is not required.
Create your Free Account
You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals.
A practical approach to common symptoms: differences between primary care and emergency medicine
The author categorizes physical symptoms into three groups: ‘Pain’, ‘respiratory’, and ‘nonpain and nonrespiratory’ (NP+NR). Examples for ‘NP+NR’ are ‘fatigue’ or ’diarrhoea’. In ED settings, ‘fatigue’ should be assigned as a nonspecific complaint (NSC) with a wide array of differential diagnoses (2), while ‘diarrhoea’ should be classified as a specific complaint (SC) due to its limited differential diagnostic spectrum. Thus, the proposed ‘NP+NR’ group encompasses both NSCs and SCs.
As patients with NSCs represent up to 20% of ED patients and NSCs and SCs show fundamental differences, there are three main issues to consider: First, the used classification with three groups of physical symptoms is not easily applicable to all settings: When applying this classification to a Swedish cohort of about 13000 ED patients (3), the amount of ‘NP+NR’ symptoms reaches up to 50%. Even if the classification is applied using all presenting complaints, the amount of ‘NP+NR’ symptoms is about 45% (own, unpublished data, 6282 ED patients). This demonstrates that ‘NP+NR’ encompasses too many symptoms in one single group. Second, the author describes that initially not expected serious diseases seldom lead to serious outcome. This may be accurate in primary care and for SCs but not for ED patients with NSCs. These are at risk for delayed diagnoses, acute morbidity (60%) 30-day mortality (6%) (4). Third, the assumption that history contributes to the final diagnosis in up to 75% of cases (1) might be true for SCs. However, establishing a working diagnosis in patients with NSCs solely by history taking is less successful. Diagnostic accuracy in NSC relying on history exceeds chance performance, but varies largely across the different presentations (5).
In conclusion, we believe that any practical approach to common symptoms should address NSCs separately. Unfortunately, ‘NP+NR’ contains both SCs and NSCs and is a rather impractical approach in the emergency physician’s perspective.
1. Kroenke K. A Practical and Evidence-Based Approach to Common Symptoms: A Narrative Review. Annals of internal medicine. 2014;161(8):579-86.
2. Karakoumis J, Nickel CH, Kirsch M, Rohacek M, Geigy N, Müller B, et al. Emergency presentations with nonspecific complaints – the burden of morbidity and the spectrum of underlying disease.
3. Safwenberg U, Terént A, Lind L. The Emergency Department presenting complaint as predictor of in-hospital fatality. European journal of emergency medicine. 2007;14(6):324-31.
4. Nemec M, Koller MT, Nickel CH, Maile S, Winterhalder C, Karrer C, et al. Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Non‐specific Complaints: The Basel Non‐specific Complaints (BANC) Study. Academic Emergency Medicine. 2010;17(3):284-92.
5. Hertwig R, Meier N, Nickel C, Zimmermann P-C, Ackermann S, Woike JK, et al. Correlates of diagnostic accuracy in patients with nonspecific complaints. Medical Decision Making. 2013;33(4):533-43.