Migration is considered a depression risk factor when associated with psychosocial adversity, but its impact on depression's clinical characteristics has not been specifically studied. We compared 85 migrants to 34 controls, examining depression's severity, symptomatology, comorbidity profile and clinical course. A MINI interview modified to assess course characteristics was used to assign DSM-IV axis I diagnoses; medical files were used for Somatoform Disorders. Severity was assessed with the Montgomery-Asberg scale. Wherever possible, we adjusted comparisons for age and gender using logistic and linear regressions. Depression in migrants was characterized by higher comorbidity (mostly somatoform and anxiety disorders), higher severity, and a non-recurrent, chronic course. Our sample comes from a single center, and should be replicated in other health care facilities and other countries. Somatoform disorder diagnoses were solely based on file-content. Depression in migrants presented as a complex, chronic clinical picture. Most of our migrant patients experienced significant psychosocial adversity before and after migration: beyond cultural issues, our results suggest that psychosocial adversity impacts on the clinical expression of depression. Our study also suggests that migration associated with psychosocial adversity might play a specific etiological role, resulting in a distinct clinical picture, questioning the DSM-IV unitarian model of depression. The chronic course might indicate a resistance to standard therapeutic regimen and hints at the necessity of developing specific treatment strategies, adapted to the individual patients and their specific context.

Phronesis is often described as a ‘practical wisdom’ adapted to the matters of everyday human life. Phronesis enables one to judge what is at stake in a situation and what means are required to bring about a good outcome. In medicine, phronesis tends to be called upon to deal with ethical issues and to offer a critique of clinical practice as a straightforward instrumental application of scientific knowledge. There is, however, a paucity of empirical studies of phronesis, including in medicine. Using a hermeneutic and phenomenological approach, this inquiry explores how phronesis is manifest in the stories of clinical practice of eleven exemplary physicians. The findings highlight five overarching themes: ethos (or character) of the physician, clinical habitus revealed in physician know-how, encountering the patient with attentiveness, modes of reasoning amidst complexity, and embodied perceptions (such as intuitions or gut feeling). The findings open a discussion about the contingent nature of clinical situations, a hermeneutic mode of clinical thinking, tacit dimensions of being and doing in clinical practice, the centrality of caring relations with patients, and the elusive quality of some aspects of practice. This study deepens understandings of the nature of phronesis within clinical settings and proposes ‘Clinical phronesis’ as a descriptor for its appearance and role in the daily practice of (exemplary) physicians.

George Engel's (1913-1999) biopsychosocial model, one of the most significant proposals for the renewal of medicine in the latter half of the 20th century, has been understood primarily as a multi-factorial approach to the etiology of disease and as a call to re-humanize clinical practice. This common reading of Engel's model misses the central aspect of his proposal, that the biopsychosocial model is an epistemology for clinical work. By stating the simple fact that the clinician is not dealing directly with a body, but first, and inevitably, with a person, Engel challenged the epistemology implicit in the classical clinical method a method predicated on the possibility of direct access to the body. Framed in epistemological terms, the issue at stake is not the need to complement medical science with humane virtues, but rather to acknowledge that the object of clinical practice is not the body but the patient.

Background: Caring for patients with substance use disorders (SUD) is held in low regard and many clinicians resist treating them. To address this situation, numerous research projects assessed training program gaps and professional attitudes. In contrast, this study explored the actual clinical difficulties that a variety of hospital-based professionals encounter when treating patients with SUD. Methods: Qualitative multiple method design including: (1) individual semi-structured interviews with SUD experts and educators; (2) video-elicited, cross self-confrontation interviews with clinicians working in a specialist addiction unit; (3) paired semi-structured interviews with clinicians working in non-specialist units. Participants were recruited within one university hospital. Data collected at stages (1) and (3) relied on an interview guide and were analyzed using conventional content analyses. Data collected at stage (2) consisted of discussions of video recorded clinical interviews and were analyzed based on a participatory approach. Results: Twenty-three clinicians from seven hospital units participated. Forty-four difficulties were reported that we classified into six categories: knowledge-based; moral; technical; relational; identity-related; institutional. We identified seven cross-category themes as key features of SUD clinical complexity: exacerbation of patient characteristics; multiplication of medical issues; hybridity and specificity of medical discipline; experiences of stalemate, adversity, and role reversal. Conclusions: Our study, providing a comprehensive analysis of the difficulties of caring for patients with SUD, reveals a highly challenging clinical practice for a diversity of healthcare providers. They represent a complementary approach to addressing resistance as an important feature of a complex clinical system, and valuable material to discussing professional preparedness.