Validity of the Rome III Criteria in assessing constipation in women

Digesu, G. Alessandro; Panayi, Demetri; Kundi, Natasha; Tekkis, Paris; Fernando, Ruwan; Khullar, Vik

doi:10.1007/s00192-010-1179-0

Cited by 22 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Since different time periods are being rated (subjects began keeping the diary after giving their retrospective rating of the past year), perfect agreement would not be expected. Digesu and colleagues [9] utilizing respondents from urogynecology, gynecology, and colorectal clinics found that women had difficulty recalling bowel symptoms that had occurred even within a 6-month period. With recall there is the potential for recall bias to influence responses to bowel questionnaires [17–19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But this information may not capture the typical bowel pattern. For example, in one study investigators noted that women with functional constipation had difficulty remembering if symptoms had occurred more or less during a 6-month period [9]. Daily pain and stooling recorded over 4 weeks may provide different information than retrospective recall over several months.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Subtypes of Irritable Bowel Syndrome Based on Abdominal Pain/Discomfort Severity and Bowel Pattern

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION IBS traditionally has been classified by stooling pattern (e.g., diarrhea-predominant). However, other patterns of symptoms have long been recognized, e.g., pain severity. Our objective was to examine the utility of subtyping women with IBS based on pain/discomfort severity as well as predominant bowel pattern. METHODS Women (n=166) with IBS completed interviews, questionnaires, and kept a diary for 28 days. Rome II questionnaire items eliciting past 3-month recall of hard and loose stools, and frequency and severity of abdominal pain or discomfort were used to classify participants into six subtypes - three bowel pattern categories by two pain/discomfort severity categories. Concordance of these subtypes with corresponding diary items was examined. Analysis of variance tested the relationship of bowel pattern and pain categories to measures of quality of life and symptoms. RESULTS There is moderate congruence of retrospective classification of bowel pattern and pain/discomfort severity subtypes with prospectively reported stool frequency and consistency and pain severity. Quality of life, impact of IBS on work and daily activities, and cognitive beliefs about IBS differed significantly based on abdominal pain/discomfort category but not on predominant bowel pattern. There is evidence of an interaction, with the effect of pain severity being strong in the IBS-diarrhea and IBS-mixed groups but absent in the IBS-constipation group. Similar results hold for most diary symptoms, except for those directly related to bowel pattern. CONCLUSIONS Overall distress of abdominal pain/discomfort is more strongly related to severity of abdominal pain/discomfort than is the predominant stool pattern in patients with IBS. Categorizing IBS patients by abdominal pain/discomfort severity in conjunction with predominant bowel pattern may be useful to clinicians and researchers in developing more effective management.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subtypes of Irritable Bowel Syndrome Based on Abdominal Pain/Discomfort Severity and Bowel Pattern

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…8,9 For constipation to be defined as chronic, a patient must be symptomatic for at least 6 months with applicable criteria for the previous 3 months. 3,9 Although the validity of the Rome III criteria for constipation has been recently questioned, 10 with a known disparity between self-reported and criteria-based definitions, 11 the use of colonic transit time 12,13 and anorectal function tests 14 as diagnostic tools is still controversial. In general, the prevalence of constipation among the general population in North America has been quoted as 1.9% to 27.2%, 15,16 with 50% to 74% of the institutionalized elderly reporting daily use of laxatives.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Chronic Constipation: An Evidence-Based Review

Leung¹,

Riutta²,

Kotecha³

et al. 2011

The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine

272

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Chronic constipation is a common condition seen in family practice among the elderly and women. There is no consensus regarding its exact definition, and it may be interpreted differently by physicians and patients. Physicians prescribe various treatments, and patients often adopt different over-the-counter remedies. Chronic constipation is either caused by slow colonic transit or pelvic floor dysfunction, and treatment differs accordingly.Methods: To update our knowledge of chronic constipation and its etiology and best-evidence treatment, information was synthesized from articles published in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Levels of evidence and recommendations were made according to the Strength of Recommendation taxonomy.Results

show abstract

“…One goal was to aid in pathophysiological understanding, diagnosis, and medical treatment through the evaluation of the constipation sufferer's condition (Agachan, Chen, Pfeifer, Reissman, & Wexner, 1996;Knowles et al, 2000 ;Varma et al, 2008 ). Another study sought to compare the Rome international criteria with the sufferer's self-reported awareness of constipation ( Digesu et al, 2010 ;Garrigues et al, 2004 ). The aim in another study was simply to diagnose functional constipation and assess its symptoms ( Chan et al, 2005 ).…”

Section: The Outline and Features Of The Assessment Scalesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Measures to Evaluate Constipation

Izumi

2014

Gastroenterology Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to review current constipation assessment scales and clarify (a) the nature of extant measurements and (b) the criteria contained in the measures. A review of relevant literature from inception to 2011 was extracted from PubMed, CINHAL, Cochrane, and MEDLINE databases by searching for the following key words: constipation, scale, measurement, questionnaire, and assessment. Eight scales were reviewed. The scales under review measured constipation from a subjective viewpoint. All measurement criteria included in 8 of the scales were arranged into 51 items and divided into 5 categories. Categories used to measure the severity of constipation were defecation difficulties, abdominal symptoms, emotional effects of constipation, self-treatment strategies, and individual characteristics. Original and suitable scales for the measurement of the severity of constipation based on the review were the Patient-Assessment of Constipation Symptoms scale and the Constipation Assessment Scale. The Patient-Assessment of Constipation Symptoms scale and the Constipation Assessment Scale are reliable, valid, original, and suitable scales to measure the severity of constipation for subjects.

show abstract

Validity of the Rome III Criteria in assessing constipation in women

Abstract: The Rome III Criteria questionnaire is a reliable and reproducible tool but does not appear to be a valid instrument in diagnosing constipation.

Cited by 22 publications

References 25 publications

Subtypes of Irritable Bowel Syndrome Based on Abdominal Pain/Discomfort Severity and Bowel Pattern

Subtypes of Irritable Bowel Syndrome Based on Abdominal Pain/Discomfort Severity and Bowel Pattern

Chronic Constipation: An Evidence-Based Review

The Measures to Evaluate Constipation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About