4.3 Article

Evaluation of gastrointestinal symptoms in different patient groups using the visual analogue scale for irritable bowel syndrome (VAS-IBS)

期刊

BMC GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-230X-11-122

关键词

-

资金

  1. Development Foundation of Region Skane

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and gastrointestinal (GI) dysmotility disorders have a similar clinical picture, although dysmotility disorders require the attention of a specialist. Patients with primary Sjogren's syndrome (pSS) have also been described to suffer from IBS-like symptoms. No objective marker is available to distinguish between the patients. A visual analogue scale has been developed for IBS patients (VAS-IBS) to measure treatment response of GI symptoms and well-being in patients with IBS. The aim of the present study was to examine if VAS-IBS could be used to compare the degree of GI complaints in different patient populations, to get an objective marker to differentiate between the patients. Methods: The VAS-IBS consists of 7 VAS scales, namely, abdominal pain, diarrhoea, constipation, bloating and flatulence, vomiting and nausea, psychological well-being and the intestinal symptoms' influence on daily life. Consecutive female patients suffering from IBS, dysmotility disorders and pSS were asked to complete the VAS-IBS questionnaire when visiting the out-patient clinics. In addition, a control population consisting of healthy female volunteers was included. Results: Healthy volunteers had almost no GI symptoms, whereas all 3 patient groups expressed symptoms. There was no statistical significant difference between IBS and dysmotility in any of the scales besides vomiting and nausea (p = 0.044). Except for constipation, patients with pSS had less severe symptoms than the others. Conclusion: The VAS-IBS questionnaire could be used to assess the level of GI symptoms. However, VAS scores do not help the clinicians to differentiate between IBS and other dysmotility disturbances.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据