Editorial: subgroups in irritable bowel syndrome—more than just diarrhoea and constipation? Authors' reply

Polster, Annikka; Oudenhove, Lukas Van; Jones, Michael; Öhman, Lena; Törnblom, Hans; Simrén, Magnus

doi:10.1111/apt.14260

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 12 publications

(15 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a previous attempt to improve stratification of this complex disorder, our group created a classification approach that takes into account a comprehensive set of GI, extraintestinal somatic, as well as psychological symptoms. To estimate the validity of this approach, we proposed three requirements to be tested: reproducibility, potential differences in underlying pathophysiology, as well as whether group membership could be utilized as a predictor for treatment outcome. In the here presented study, we have, as a first step, explored the reproducibility of the subgroups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subgroups of IBS patients are characterized by specific, reproducible profiles of GI and non‐GI symptoms and report differences in healthcare utilization: A population‐based study

Polster

Palsson

Törnblom

et al. 2018

Neurogastroenterology Motil

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In a previous clinical sample of IBS patients, subgroups characterized by profiles of GI and non‐GI symptoms were identified. We aimed to replicate these subgroups and symptom associations in participants fulfilling IBS diagnostic criteria from a population‐based study and relate them to healthcare utilization. Methods An Internet‐based health survey was completed by general population adults from United States, Canada, and UK. Respondents fulfilling IBS diagnosis (Rome III and IV) were analyzed for latent subgroups using Gaussian mixture model analysis. Symptom measures were derived from validated questionnaires: IBS‐related GI symptoms (Rome IV), extraintestinal somatic symptoms (PHQ‐12), and psychological symptoms (SF‐8). Key Results A total of 637 respondents fulfilled Rome III criteria (average age 46 years, range 18‐87, 66% females) and 341 Rome IV criteria (average age 44, range 18‐77, 64% female) for IBS. Seven subgroups were identified in the Rome III cohort, characterized by profiles of GI symptoms (constipation‐related, diarrhea‐related, and mixed, respectively), and further distinguished by the presence or absence of non‐GI comorbidities. The Rome IV cohort showed five similar but less distinct subgroups with a preponderance of mixed symptom profiles. Higher severity of non‐GI comorbidities was associated with more frequent healthcare visits and medication usage. Conclusions and Inferences In line with previous findings in a clinical IBS cohort, we were able to identify population‐based subgroups characterized by a combination of GI symptoms with the additional distinction made by varying severity of non‐GI symptoms and with differences in healthcare utilization.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subgroups of IBS patients are characterized by specific, reproducible profiles of GI and non‐GI symptoms and report differences in healthcare utilization: A population‐based study

Polster

Palsson

Törnblom

et al. 2018

Neurogastroenterology Motil

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Editorial: subgroups in irritable bowel syndrome—more than just diarrhoea and constipation? Authors' reply

Abstract: Linked ContentThis article is linked to Black and Ford, and Patel et al papers. To view these articles visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.14238 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.13074.

Cited by 1 publication

References 12 publications

Subgroups of IBS patients are characterized by specific, reproducible profiles of GI and non‐GI symptoms and report differences in healthcare utilization: A population‐based study

Subgroups of IBS patients are characterized by specific, reproducible profiles of GI and non‐GI symptoms and report differences in healthcare utilization: A population‐based study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About