19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A self administered reliable questionnaire to assess lower bowel symptoms

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Bowel symptoms are considered indicators of the presence of colorectal cancer and other bowel diseases. Self administered questionnaires that elicit information about lower bowel symptoms have not been assessed for reliability, although this has been done for upper bowel symptoms. Our aim was to develop a self administered questionnaire for eliciting the presence, nature and severity of lower bowel symptoms potentially related to colorectal cancer, and assess its reliability.

          Methods

          Immediately before consulting a gastroenterologist or colorectal surgeon, 263 patients likely to have a colonoscopy completed the questionnaire. Reliability was assessed in two ways: by assessing agreement between patient responses and (a) responses given by the doctor at the consultation; and (b) responses given by patients two weeks later.

          Results

          There was more than 75% agreement for 78% of the questions for the patient-doctor comparison and for 92% of the questions for the patient-patient comparison. Agreement for the length of time a symptom was present, its severity, duration, frequency of occurrence and whether or not medical consultation had been sought, all had agreement of greater than 70%. Over all questions, the chance corrected agreement for the patient-doctor comparison had a median kappa of 65% (which represents substantial agreement), interquartile range 57–72%. The patient-patient comparison also showed substantial agreement with a median kappa of 75%, interquartile range 68–81%.

          Conclusion

          This self administered questionnaire about lower bowel symptoms is a useful way of eliciting details of bowel symptoms. It is a reliable instrument that is acceptable to patients and easily completed. Its use could guide the clinical consultation, allowing a more efficient, comprehensive and useful interaction, ensuring that all symptoms are assessed. It will also be a useful tool in research studies on bowel symptoms and their predictive value for colorectal cancer and other diseases. Studies assessing whether bowel symptoms predict the presence of colorectal cancer should provide estimates of the reliability of the symptom elicitation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A patient questionnaire to identify bowel disease.

          Although functional gastrointestinal symptoms are seen frequently by internists and are the commonest reason for patients to be referred to gastroenterologists, no validated self-report questionnaire is available for their diagnosis. To differentiate among non-ulcer dyspepsia, the irritable bowel syndrome, organic gastrointestinal disease, and health, we developed a self-report questionnaire. Our bowel disease questionnaire, which evaluated 46 symptom-related items was completed prospectively by 361 subjects before their clinical evaluation as outpatients. Of these subjects, 115 were categorized ultimately as having functional bowel disease (non-ulcer dyspepsia or the irritable bowel syndrome), 101 were categorized ultimately as having organic gastrointestinal disease, and 145 were healthy persons having routine periodic examinations for whom no additional diagnoses were made. All diagnoses were based on independent clinical evaluations, not on the patients' responses to the questionnaire. The bowel disease questionnaire was acceptable and easily completed; it elicited symptoms in a highly reliable manner and was shown to be a valid measure of functional bowel complaints. Our questionnaire discriminated non-ulcer dyspepsia from irritable bowel syndrome with a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 72%, and it discriminated functional bowel disease from organic disease and health with sensitivities of 85% and 83%, and specificities of 60% and 76%, respectively. We believe that this questionnaire is an additional and useful diagnostic tool for identifying patients with functional gastrointestinal symptoms.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease: a review.

            The use of proxy raters of patients' quality of life has been suggested as a means of facilitating the factoring of quality-of-life considerations explicitly into the medical decision-making process and of resolving the problem of missing data in longitudinal quality-of-life investigations. This review addresses two questions related to the potential role of such proxy raters in clinical research and practice: (1) to what extent are health care providers and lay individuals involved in the care of patients ("significant others") able to assess accurately the quality of life of patients with chronic disease? and (2) under what conditions, if any, is inclusion of such proxy ratings in quality-of-life investigations warranted? Although the extant literature yields few unequivocal findings, a number of clear trends can be identified: (i) health care providers and significant others tend, in general, to underestimate patients' quality of life; (ii) health care providers and significant others appear to evaluate patients' quality of life with a comparable degree of (in)accuracy; (iii) health care providers tend to underrate the pain intensity of their patients; (iv) proxy ratings appear to be more accurate when the information sought is concrete and observable; and (v) while significant others' ratings tend to be more accurate when they live in close proximity to the patient, they can also be biased by the caregiving function of the rater. There is need for more methodologically sound studies that: (a) incorporate head-to-head comparisons of health care providers and significant others as proxy raters; (b) employ well-validated quality-of-life measures; and (3) employ a longitudinal design in order to examine the effect of changes in patients' health status over time on the ability of proxies to provide valid quality-of-life assessments.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book: not found

              The Cambridge dictionary of statistics

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Gastroenterol
                BMC Gastroenterology
                BioMed Central
                1471-230X
                2008
                1 March 2008
                : 8
                : 8
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Screening and Test Evaluation Program (STEP), School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Australia
                [2 ]Gastroenterology Dept, Concord Hospital, University of Sydney, Australia
                [3 ]Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Concord Hospital, University of Sydney, Australia
                Article
                1471-230X-8-8
                10.1186/1471-230X-8-8
                2311315
                18312680
                63272495-62f0-438d-8c61-961dc5ad088d
                Copyright © 2008 Adelstein et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 24 September 2007
                : 1 March 2008
                Categories
                Research Article

                Gastroenterology & Hepatology
                Gastroenterology & Hepatology

                Comments

                Comment on this article