13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Treatment Algorithm for Chronic Idiopathic Constipation and Constipation-Predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome Derived from a Canadian National Survey and Needs Assessment on Choices of Therapeutic Agents

      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. Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) and constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C) are common functional lower gastrointestinal disorders that impair patients' quality of life. In a national survey, we aimed to evaluate (1) Canadian physician practice patterns in the utilization of therapeutic agents listed in the new ACG and AGA guidelines; (2) physicians satisfaction with these agents for their CIC and IBS-C patients; and (3) the usefulness of these new guidelines in their clinical practice. Methods. A 9-item questionnaire was sent to 350 Canadian specialists to evaluate their clinical practice for the management of CIC and IBS-C. Results. The response rate to the survey was 16% ( n = 55). Almost all (96%) respondents followed a standard, stepwise approach for management while they believed that only 24% of referring physicians followed the same approach. Respondents found guanylyl cyclase C (GCC) agonist most satisfying when treating their patients. Among the 69% of respondents who were aware of published guidelines, only 50% found them helpful in prioritizing treatment choices and 69% of respondents indicated that a treatment algorithm, applicable to Canadian practice, would be valuable. Conclusion. Based on this needs assessment, a treatment algorithm was developed to provide clinical guidance in the management of IBS-C and CIC in Canada.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

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

          Global prevalence of and risk factors for irritable bowel syndrome: a meta-analysis.

          Many cross-sectional surveys have reported the prevalence of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but there have been no recent systematic review of data from all studies to determine its global prevalence and risk factors. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EMBASE Classic were searched (until October 2011) to identify population-based studies that reported the prevalence of IBS in adults (≥15 years old); IBS was defined by using specific symptom-based criteria or questionnaires. The prevalence of IBS was extracted for all studies and based on the criteria used to define it. Pooled prevalence, according to study location and certain other characteristics, odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Of the 390 citations evaluated, 81 reported the prevalence of IBS in 80 separate study populations containing 260,960 subjects. Pooled prevalence in all studies was 11.2% (95% CI, 9.8%-12.8%). The prevalence varied according to country (from 1.1% to 45.0%) and criteria used to define IBS. The greatest prevalence values were calculated when ≥3 Manning criteria were used (14%; 95% CI, 10.0%-17.0%); by using the Rome I and Rome II criteria, prevalence values were 8.8% (95% CI, 6.8%-11.2%) and 9.4% (95% CI, 7.8%-11.1%), respectively. The prevalence was higher for women than men (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.53-1.82) and lower for individuals older than 50 years, compared with those younger than 50 (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.92). There was no effect of socioeconomic status, but only 4 studies reported these data. The prevalence of IBS varies among countries, as well as criteria used to define its presence. Women are at slightly higher risk for IBS than men. The effects of socioeconomic status have not been well described. Copyright © 2012 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Epidemiology of constipation in North America: a systematic review.

            The aim of this study was to systematically review the published literature regarding prevalence, risk factors, incidence, natural history, and the effect on quality of life of constipation in North America. A computer-assisted search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Current Contents databases was performed independently by two investigators. Study selection criteria included the following: (1) North American population-based sample of adults with constipation; (2) publication in full manuscript form in English; and (3) report on the prevalence, incidence, and natural history of constipation or impact of constipation on quality of life. Eligible articles were reviewed in a duplicate, independent manner. Data extracted were compiled in tables and presented in descriptive form. The estimates of the prevalence of constipation in North America ranged from 1.9% to 27.2%, with most estimates from 12% to 19%. Prevalence estimates by gender support a female-to-male ratio of 2.2:1. Constipation appears to increase with increasing age, particularly after age 65. No true population-based incidence studies or natural history studies were identified. In one cohort, 89% of patients with constipation still reported constipation at 14.7 months follow-up. From limited data, quality of life appears to be diminished by constipation, but the clinical significance of this is unclear. Constipation is very common, as approximately 63 million people in North America meet the Rome II criteria for constipation. Minimal data are available regarding incidence, natural history, and quality of life in patients with constipation. Effort should be expended toward the study of these topics, particularly in the elderly, who are disproportionately affected by this condition.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A placebo-controlled trial of prucalopride for severe chronic constipation.

              In this 12-week trial, we aimed to determine the efficacy of prucalopride, a selective, high-affinity 5-hydroxytryptamine4 receptor agonist, in patients with severe chronic constipation. In our multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 trial, patients with severe chronic constipation (< or =2 spontaneous, complete bowel movements per week) received placebo or 2 or 4 mg of prucalopride, once daily, for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients having three or more spontaneous, complete bowel movements per week, averaged over 12 weeks. Secondary efficacy end points were derived from daily diaries and validated questionnaires completed by patients. Adverse events, clinical laboratory values, and cardiovascular effects were monitored. Efficacy was analyzed in 620 patients. The proportion of patients with three or more spontaneous, complete bowel movements per week was 30.9% of those receiving 2 mg of prucalopride and 28.4% of those receiving 4 mg of prucalopride, as compared with 12.0% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Over 12 weeks, 47.3% of patients receiving 2 mg of prucalopride and 46.6% of those receiving 4 mg of prucalopride had an increase in the number of spontaneous, complete bowel movements of one or more per week, on average, as compared with 25.8% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). All other secondary efficacy end points, including patients' satisfaction with their bowel function and treatment and their perception of the severity of their constipation symptoms, were significantly improved with the use of 2 or 4 mg of prucalopride as compared with placebo, at week 12. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events were headache and abdominal pain. There were no significant cardiovascular effects of treatment. Over 12 weeks, prucalopride significantly improved bowel function and reduced the severity of symptoms in patients with severe chronic constipation. Larger and longer trials are required to further assess the risks and benefits of the use of prucalopride for chronic constipation. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00483886 [ClinicalTrials.gov].). Copyright 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol
                Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol
                CJGH
                Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology
                Hindawi Publishing Corporation
                2291-2789
                2291-2797
                2017
                8 February 2017
                : 2017
                : 8612189
                Affiliations
                1University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
                2McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
                3University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
                4McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
                5University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
                Author notes
                *Louis W. C. Liu: louis.liu@ 123456uhn.ca

                Academic Editor: Dina Kao

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2487-1479
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4740-8209
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0523-9032
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6899-7941
                Article
                10.1155/2017/8612189
                5320366
                72f13070-3136-4fa5-b899-660d231f0327
                Copyright © 2017 Yvonne Tse et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 28 July 2016
                : 23 November 2016
                : 18 December 2016
                Categories
                Research Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article