Keywords
income - perceived stress - pseudoseizures
Introduction
Dissociation is defined as “a disruption in the usually integrated functions of consciousness,
memory, identity, or perception of the environment.”[1] Pseudoseizures are a specific form of dissociation which involve “involuntary experiential
and behavioral responses to internal or external triggers that superficially resemble
epileptic seizures but which are not associated with the abnormal electrical activity
associated with epileptic seizures,”[2] therefore, pseudoseizures are paroxysmal alterations in behavior that resemble epileptic
seizures but are without any organic cause.[3]
Pseudoseizures are a state of altered awareness which acts as an avoidance response,
protecting the individual from stressful events, and function as a coping strategy.[4] Historically, pseudoseizures were known as hysterical seizures and were regarded
as a manifestation of an emotional disturbance.[5] Dissociation would appear to be an essential feature of pseudoseizures, which in
turn might be viewed as a form of nonverbal communication of emotional distress,[6] possibly representing a wish to escape from a difficult or unpleasant situation.[7] International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) categorizes pseudoseizures
as dissociative disorders[8] and the ICD, 11th Revision, lists such attacks as “dissociative neurological symptom
disorder, with nonepileptic seizures.”[9]
Perceived stress reflects the interaction between an individual and their environment
which they appraise as stressful.[10] The same situation may be appraised differently by different individuals due to
their psychosocial correlates and thus have a different impact on each. With respect
to women, the multiple role requirements of childbearing and child rearing, running
the family home, caring for sick relatives, and earning an income have found to lead
to considerable stress.[11] In extension of the concept of stress as a cause of dissociation, the coping process
that an individual employs in dealing with stressors and problems aids in the understanding
of dissociative disorders. Coping is the cognitive and behavioral efforts made to
master, tolerate, or reduce external and internal demands and conflicts among them.[12] The seizure-like behaviors have been conceived of as resulting from a maladaptive
coping approach to stressful situations that are perceived as unbearable.[13] Patients with pseudoseizures have also been observed to have difficulties in family
functioning, especially in the domains of communication, affective involvement, and
general functioning.[14] On the other hand, pseudoseizures have also been conceptualized as serving a function
of garnering attention for the patient within the family, especially for those individuals
who feel a lack of concern from their families.[15] Thus, dysfunctional family patterns,[16] perceived stress, and coping strategies employed are all contributing factors in
the development and maintenance of pseudoseizures.
Socioeconomic status is a complex concept that is assessed indirectly using a variety
of different measures such as income, occupational status, and education.[17] Literature has consistently identified a higher prevalence of females with dissociative
convulsions as belonging to a middle to low income group,[16]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22] where low income was found to be associated with several lifetime mental disorders
and suicide attempts and a reduction in income overtime was associated with increased
risk for incident mental disorders.[22]
A review of available literature reveals that little is known about the impact of
income on perceived stress, coping strategies, and family functioning in females with
dissociative seizures. While several studies have identified patients with pseudoseizures
as hailing from a low socioeconomic stratum, none have directly studied the contribution
of income to the causes and consequences of the patients’ psychopathology. The present
study was an attempt to explore relationship and contribution of income on perceived
stress, coping strategies, and family functioning in females with dissociative convulsions.
Aim
The aim of this article was to assess the contribution of income on perceived stress,
coping strategies employed, and family functioning of females with pseudoseizures.
Materials and Methods
Participant Selection
The participants were 91 female patients diagnosed with dissociative convulsions,
according to the criteria laid down by ICD-10,[8] recruited consecutively from the psychiatry outpatient department (OPD). Participants
were referred from neurology and general medicine units to the psychiatry OPD of a
tertiary care hospital in India. The diagnosis of dissociative convulsions was established
clinically by a team of psychiatrists and clinical psychologist.
Inclusion Criteria
-
Age: 18 to 45 years.
-
Dissociative convulsions (according to ICD-10 criteria).
-
Sex: Female.
Exclusion Criteria
-
A concurrent clinical diagnosis of psychosis, organic brain syndrome, drug dependence,
or mental retardation.
-
History of major medical disorders such as diabetes mellitus, major cardiac problems,
chronic renal failure, chronic liver disease, autoimmune diseases, and comorbid seizure
disorder.
Procedure
After the procedure was carefully explained to the participant, a written informed
consent for participation in the study was obtained from them. A detailed psychiatric
history and mental status examination was conducted following which each participant
completed the Cohen’s Perceived Stress Scale,[10] Folkman and Lazarus’ Ways of Coping Questionnaire,[23] McMasters Family Assessment Device (FAD)–General Functioning Scale,[24] and semistructured sociodemographic performa. All questionnaires were translated
and back translated by bilingual experts. Per capita monthly income was defined as
the family’s total monthly income divided by the number of partakers and income was
divided into quartiles based on the distribution of the sample. This method of dividing
household income into quartiles has been used in several epidemiological studies to
ensure adequate power in each of the categories.[25]
Tools
Cohen’s Perceived Stress Scale[10]
Cohen’s Perceived Stress Scale is a 10-item scale designed to measure the degree to
which one perceives aspects of life as uncontrollable, unpredictable, and overloading.
Participants were asked to respond to each question on a 5-point Likert scale ranging
from 0 to 4, indicating how often they have felt or thought a certain way within the
past month. Scores range from 0 to 40, with higher composite scores indicative of
greater perceived stress.
Folkman and Lazarus’ Ways of Coping Questionnaire[23]
Ways of Coping Questionnaire is a 66-item questionnaire designed to assess coping
processes used in a particular stressful encounter (and not coping styles or traits).
It measures eight ways of coping, namely confrontative coping, distancing, self-controlling,
seeking social support, accepting responsibility, escape-avoidance, Planful Problem
Solving, and Positive Reappraisal. Participants were asked to respond to each question
on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 to 3, indicating the extent to which it was
used.
McMaster’s Family Assessment Device–General Functioning Scale[24]
The 12-item subscale of General Functioning was utilized from The McMaster FAD. It
has been validated as a single index measure to assess family functioning. The measure
includes statements about family communication and support, on a 4-point Likert scale.
The average of the individual item scores is then calculated, with scores greater
than or equal to 2.0 indicating family dysfunction.
Semistructured Sociodemographic Performa
Was used to record the following sociodemographic information of the participants:
-
Monthly per capita income: The sum of net monthly salaries and other income (pensions,
dividends, interests, or rents) contributed by each household member was divided by
the number of family members (regardless of age) to generate a per capita monthly
income. Per capita income was treated both as a continuous and categorical (quartiles
and deciles) variable and was arbitrarily subdivided in four equal categories of INR
≥ 5,000, 5,001 to 10,000, 10,001 to 15,000, and 15,001 to 20,000.
-
Education: Participants’ own educational level was subdivided in five categories according
to whether participants were illiterate or had completed primary education (1–5 years),
metric (6–9 years), secondary education (10–12 years), or graduation (more than 12
years).
-
Employment status: Participants’ current employment status was recorded. The two subcategories
were employed (paid occupation) and unemployed (work without remuneration).
-
Area of residence: Participants’ permanent area of residence was recorded. The two
subcategories were urban areas (cities, towns, conurbations, or suburbs) and rural
areas (villages and hamlets).
Analysis
The data were entered on MS Excel and analyzed by SPSS version 23 using appropriate
descriptive (mean, standard deviation [SD], range, and frequency) and interpretative
statistics (bivariate correlation, linear regression, t-test). All p-values less than 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. Results of
inferential analysis indicate that the sample of the study was normally distributed.
Results
The study included 91 subjects diagnosed with pseudoseizures. [Table 1] shows the relevant demographic profile of the study sample. Descriptive analysis
of the sample revealed that the female were between the ages of 18 and 45 years (mean
= 30.34, SD = 8.82), with the majority (51.6%) being under 30 years of age. Most participants
were illiterate (28.6%) or educated unto primary school (28.6%), majority (73.6%)
were unemployed, and primarily belonged to rural parts of northern India (54.9%).
The mean per capita monthly income was INR 4,734 (± 2,895), with the minimum income
being INR 750 and the maximum being INR 20,000 and where a large percentage (71.4%)
had a monthly per capita income less than INR 5,000.
Table 1
Sociodemographic profile (N = 91)
|
n
|
Percentage (%)
|
Mean
|
SD
|
Range
|
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation.
|
Per capita monthly income (INR)
|
|
|
4,734.87
|
2,895.78
|
16,500
|
< 5,000
|
65
|
71.4
|
|
|
|
5,001–10,000
|
22
|
24.2
|
|
|
|
10,001–15,000
|
3
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
15,001–20,000
|
1
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
Age (y)
|
|
|
30.34
|
8.82
|
36
|
> 30
|
47
|
51.6
|
|
|
|
< 30
|
44
|
48.3
|
|
|
|
Education (y)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Illiterate
|
26
|
28.6
|
|
|
|
Primary
|
26
|
28.6
|
|
|
|
Metric
|
22
|
24.2
|
|
|
|
Senior secondary
|
11
|
12.1
|
|
|
|
Graduation
|
6
|
6.6
|
|
|
|
Employment status
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employed
|
24
|
26.4
|
|
|
|
Unemployed
|
67
|
73.6
|
|
|
|
Area of residence
|
|
|
|
|
|
Urban
|
41
|
45.1
|
|
|
|
Rural
|
50
|
54.9
|
|
|
|
Marital status
|
|
|
|
|
|
Married
|
47
|
51.6
|
|
|
|
Unmarried
|
36
|
39.6
|
|
|
|
Widow
|
3
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
Divorced
|
5
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
Live-in relationship
|
0
|
0
|
|
|
|
Family structure
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nuclear
|
56
|
61.5
|
|
|
|
Joint
|
19
|
20.9
|
|
|
|
Extended
|
16
|
17.6
|
|
|
|
To understand the magnitude and direction of correlation relationships, a bivariate
correlational analysis of per capita income with perceived stress, coping strategies,
and family functioning in females with pseudoseizures was performed. [Table 2] states that three kinds of coping strategies were statistically significant with
the patients’ per capita income. Both Planful Problem Solving and Positive Reappraisal
were positively associated with per capita income (p < 0.01), while escape-avoidance coping was found to be negatively associated with
per capita income (p < 0.05). Results showed a statistically significant negative relationship between
perceived stress scores and per capita income (p < 0.01) as well as between family functioning and per capita income (p < 0.05) (where higher scores on family functioning scale indicate higher dysfunction
in the family).
Table 2
Correlation (r) of income with perceived stress, coping processes, and family functioning
(N = 91)
Measures
|
Income
|
asignificant at the 0.05 level.
bsignificant at the 0.01 level.
|
Coping processes:
|
Confrontative
|
0.139
|
Distancing
|
–0.008
|
Self-controlling
|
0.065
|
Seeking social support
|
0.164
|
Accepting responsibility
|
–0.035
|
Escape-avoidance
|
–0.258a
|
Planful Problem Solving
|
0.257a
|
Positive Reappraisal
|
0.377b
|
Perceived stress
|
–0.312b
|
Family functioning
|
–0.266a
|
To address the potential differential contribution of income on perceived stress,
coping strategies, and family functioning in females with pseudoseizures, a linear
regression analysis was conducted. Findings shown in [Table 3] indicate that the largest contribution was found on Positive Reappraisal (37.7%)
significant at p < 0.001, followed by Perceived Stress (31.2%) significant at p < 0.01 and family functioning (26.6%) significant at p < 0.01.
Table 3
Linear regression of income on perceived stress, significant coping processes, and
family functioning (N = 91)
|
R
2
|
Standardized β
|
Standard error of β
|
t-Ratio
|
Significance
|
a
p < 0.05.
b
p < 0.01.
c
p < 0.001.
dHigher scores on family functioning scale indicate higher dysfunction.
|
Positive Reappraisal
|
0.377
|
289.73
|
75.47
|
3.83
|
0.001c
|
Perceived stress
|
–0.312
|
–137.63
|
44.39
|
–3.10
|
0.003b
|
Family functioningd
|
–0.266
|
–1,149.53
|
440.85
|
–2.60
|
0.01b
|
Planful Problem Solving
|
0.257
|
179.59
|
71.72
|
2.50
|
0.01b
|
Escape-avoidance
|
–0.17
|
–124.87
|
74.09
|
–1.70
|
0.09
|
To assess the difference between per capita income categories (> INR 5,000 and < INR
5,000) with respect to perceived stress, coping strategies, and family functioning
in females with pseudoseizures, a Student’s t-test was applied, as depicted in [Table 4]. Results were indicative of a statistically significant difference between the two
income groups on perceived stress, escape-avoidance coping, Planful Problem Solving,
Positive Reappraisal, and family functioning (p < 0.01). Findings also showed a highly significant difference between the two income
groups on Positive Reappraisal (p < 0.01) as a coping strategy.
Table 4
Difference between income categories (N = 91)
Measures
|
Group
|
n
|
Mean (SD)
|
t
|
p-Value
|
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation.
a
p < 0.01.
b
p < 0.001.
|
Perceived stress
|
> 5,000
|
65
|
28.78 (6.53)
|
–2.173
|
0.03b
|
< 5,000
|
26
|
25.54 (6.1)
|
Coping processes:
|
Confrontative
|
> 5,000
|
65
|
10.17 (3.28)
|
1.12
|
0.26
|
< 5,000
|
26
|
10.96 (2.28)
|
Distancing
|
> 5,000
|
65
|
6.05 (3.24)
|
0.03
|
0.97
|
< 5,000
|
26
|
6.08 (4.34)
|
Self-controlling
|
> 5,000
|
65
|
6.35 (3.30)
|
1.05
|
0.29
|
< 5,000
|
26
|
7.23 (4.23)
|
Seeking social support
|
> 5,000
|
65
|
9.34 (4.25)
|
1.610
|
0.11
|
< 5,000
|
26
|
10.96 (4.57)
|
Accepting responsibility
|
> 5,000
|
65
|
6.02 (3.46)
|
–0.51
|
0.61
|
< 5,000
|
26
|
5.62 (3.16)
|
Escape-avoidance
|
> 5,000
|
65
|
15.52 (4.28)
|
–2.06
|
0.04b
|
< 5,000
|
26
|
13.58 (3.42)
|
Planful Problem Solving
|
> 5,000
|
65
|
5.38 (3.98)
|
2.12
|
0.03a
|
< 5,000
|
26
|
7.38 (4.24)
|
Positive Reappraisal
|
> 5,000
|
65
|
3.78 (3.07)
|
4.19
|
0.001b
|
< 5,000
|
26
|
7.15 (4.29)
|
Family functioning
|
> 5,000
|
65
|
2.72 (0.64)
|
–1.90
|
0.05a
|
< 5,000
|
26
|
2.43. (0.70)
|
An additional analysis revealed that income and education have a strong association
(r = 0.450; p > 0.001), where higher income was seen to be associated with higher level of education.
Income was seen to contribute to 20.2% to education, which is a significant contribution
(p > 0.001).
Discussion
The aim of this study was to assess the relationship with and contribution of income
to perceived stress, coping strategies employed, and family functioning of females
with pseudoseizures.
An analysis of the findings revealed that the “typical” participant in the current
sample would be a 30-year-old unemployed, less educated female hailing from a rural
background with an average monthly per capita income of less than INR 5,000. These
findings are in broad agreement with other studies that have found a higher prevalence
of dissociative convulsions among females belonging to a middle- to low-income group
with less educational qualifications[16]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[22] and hailing from rural areas.[26]
With respect to the relationship and contribution of income, it may be inferred from
the current findings that income had a significant impact on perceived stress (31.2%),
family functioning (26.6%), and coping strategies (80.4%). An analysis of data showed
that participants with per capita income less than INR 5,000 reported higher levels
of perceived stress, greater familial dysfunction, and were more likely to engage
in maladaptive coping like escape-avoidant, when compared with higher income categories.
High perceived stress,[27]
[28] poor family functioning,[16]
[29] and greater use of escape-avoidant coping[27]
[28]
[30] have all been found to be contributing factors in the development and maintenance
of pseudoseizures. The present study added to the existing body of literature by specifying
the amount of money in Indian rupees which corresponded to an increased likelihood
of developing dissociative convulsions within a vulnerable population. It was found
that participants with a per capita income below INR 5,000, were significantly more
likely to develop dissociative convulsions; however, these findings cannot be generalized
beyond the current sample.
The association of low income with increased psychopathology in the sample may be
explained by the observation that living with less income maybe detrimental to one’s
physical and mental health, as financial hardships create a context of stress in which
stressors continue to multiply and eventually contribute to mental health problems.[31] Here, individuals continually face a lack of opportunity, reduced availability and
accessibility to resources, and a greater likelihood of experiencing difficult events.[32] Several other mechanisms such as overcrowding, hunger, violence, social networks,
and a decreased capacity to acquire health care may increase the perceived stress
in lower income groups and thus perpetuate mental health problems.[33] The resultant distress may manifest in a variety of presentations, where literature
pertaining to the Indian context, has found a high presentation of physical symptoms
without any identifiable organic causes.32 Literature also suggests that greater
distress related to negative life events may be associated with increased use of maladaptive
and emotion-focused coping in patients with dissociative convulsions.[28] As a consequence, psychopathology in women is shown to have an impact on family
functioning due to the woman’s role in running the domestic activities of the household.[34]
An additional analysis revealed that income and education have a strong positive association,
which is consistent with previous literature.[35]
[36] Income was also seen to contribute significantly to education (20.2%). An implication
of these findings is that low education may be a potentially preventable risk factor
of developing pseudoseizures, as education may influence aspirations, self-image,
and permit greater choices in life decisions.[37]
Conclusion
High levels of perceived stress, greater familial dysfunction, and maladaptive coping
had negative impacts on the outcome of female patients with pseudoseizures belonging
to lower income group. Here, an increase in income level above INR 5,000 (US $73),
was seen to correspond with lower levels of stress and family dysfunctionality and
greater use of adaptive coping strategies such as Planful Problem Solving and Positive
Reappraisal. It may be inferred from the current findings that within the basic per
capita income category of > INR 5,000, a majority of females with dissociative convulsions
were unemployed ([Table 5]) in our sample. These findings could have implications for prevention of dissociative
psychopathology especially in low-income countries, suggesting that grassroots intervention
should be undertaken to ensure education and employment for females. Since the level
of education is related with employment[11] and eventually with per capita income,[38] it may be inferred that an increase in the level of education may act as a protective
factor in dissociative convulsions, as it will eventually increase income, reduce
stress, and provide the individual with opportunities to learn more adaptive coping
processes. Indeed, another comparative study with higher income group of nonworking
female patients is needed to validate these findings.
Table 5
Difference between Income groups on sociodemographic profile (N = 91)
Income categories
|
Education (f)
|
Employment status (f)
|
Area of residence (f)
|
Illiterate
|
Primary
|
Metric
|
Senior secondary
|
Graduation
|
Employed
|
Unemployed
|
Urban
|
Rural
|
< 5,000
|
22
|
11
|
20
|
10
|
2
|
13
|
52
|
17
|
48
|
5,001–10,000
|
4
|
14
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
9
|
13
|
21
|
1
|
10,001–15,000
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
15,001–20,000
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
However, the direction of the association of income with perceived stress, coping
strategies, and family functioning, in females with pseudoseizures remains unclear,
here, as with any cross-sectional study design, the findings of the current study
cannot be used to provide a definite indication of causal direction, what is clear
is that it is not a unidimensional one-way relationship but rather an interactive
and complexly dynamic one. Another limitation of the current study is that the majority
of participants recruited for the study had an income below INR 5,000, as the data
was collected from a tertiary care government hospital offering free of cost treatment
to patients. This considerably limits the generalization of our findings. Future studies
can explore the same questions in clients from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds.