Initiative to improve detection of faecal incontinence in primary care: The GIFT Project

Enhancing the identification of anal incontinence in women of reproductive age

Anal incontinence is an unpredictable and debilitating condition that can significantly reduce quality of life. Symptoms include the involuntary loss of solid and/or liquid stool, flatus incontinence and rectal urgency. Pregnancy and childbirth are two major factors that increase the risk of anal incontinence in women of reproductive age. Women at high risk of anal incontinence include those with a known history of the condition and those who have experienced severe perineal trauma, particularly after injury to the anal sphincters (third-degree and fourth-degree tears). Routine screening for anal incontinence of women in high-risk groups during pregnancy and after childbirth appears to be limited in clinical practice. This article discusses the potential benefits of screening for anal incontinence, outlines the factors that inhibit and enable screening, describes current bowel screening tools and their limitations, and explores how the identification of anal incontinence in women of reproductive age could be improved.

How Much Knowledge and Awareness of Faecal Incontinence Is There in Primary Care?

Faecal incontinence (FI) is a debilitating symptom with a likely underreported incidence in the general population. Postpartum or postmenopausal women are at increased risk of this. General Practitioners (GPs) have a vital role in screening patient groups with FI. Knowledge of the underlying diseases associated with FI is important for all clinicians who have contact with this patient group. An online questionnaire (Survey MonkeyTM, San Mateo, CA, USA) was sent to GPs in Wales and England through a deanery, social media and GP educational groups. Questions: A total of 250 participants completed the questionnaire—195 GPs and 55 GPSTs. Two-thirds had no coloproctology experience, but 70% had worked in obstetrics and gynaecology. In total, 70% had no formal FI training and 75% felt insufficiently informed about FI. A total of 80% felt that GPs need specific training on FI. A third of respondents used the 6-week postnatal check to assess maternal bowel function and most did not appreciate faecal urgency as a symptom. Patients should be asked about FI symptoms by GPs, particularly those populations at increased risk. Our GP survey participants were enthusiastic for more education on the treatment options and where to signpost patients with FI.

Knowledge, skills, and barriers to management of faecal incontinence in Australian primary care: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

GPs play an important role in the diagnosis and management of patients with faecal incontinence (FI). However, their confidence and ability in this role are unknown.

AIM

This study aimed to investigate the knowledge, skills, and confidence of GPs to manage FI in primary care, and identify barriers to optimal management.

DESIGN & SETTING

A cross-sectional study using self-administered questionnaires of GPs attending health education seminars, which took place across Australian capital cities.

METHOD

Main outcome measures included: (i) clinical exposure to and previous training in FI; (ii) knowledge and skills in screening, diagnosing, and managing FI; and (iii) barriers and facilitators to optimising care. Associations between demographics, training and knowledge and skills were assessed.

RESULTS

Some 1285 of 1469 GPs (87.5%) participated (mean 47.7 years [standard deviation {SD} 11.3]). The vast majority reported poor clinical exposure to (88.5%) and training in FI management (91.3%). Subjectively, 69.7% rated their knowledge and skills in screening, assessing, and treating FI as suboptimal. The most commonly reported barrier to FI care was 'insufficient skills' (56.1%); facilitators were improved referral pathways (84.6%) and increased training (67.9%). GPs with more training had better knowledge (odds ratio [OR] = 24.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 13.32 to 45.51) and skills (OR = 13.87, 95% CI = 7.94 to 24.24) in managing FI.

CONCLUSION

Clinical exposure to and training in FI among GPs was poor. Accordingly, knowledge, skills, and confidence to manage FI was suboptimal. GPs recognise the importance of FI and that increased training and/or education and formalisation of referral pathways may improve the care of patients with FI in primary care.

Conservative treatment of severe defecatory urgency and fecal incontinence: minor strategies with major impact

BACKGROUND

Bowel disturbances have been identified as the most important risk factor for fecal incontinence (FI). However, few studies have evaluated the impact of fiber supplementation. Our aim was to assess the correlation between the improvement in stool consistency by fiber supplementation and the changes in urgency and number of FI episodes and in the QoL of patients with FI.

METHODS

Eighty-three patients who came to our institution with FI and/or fecal urgency associated with loose stools or diarrhea were prospectively included in the study The intervention included dietary advice and methylcellulose 500 mg every 8 h for 6 weeks. All assessments were carried out at baseline and 6 weeks after the start of the intervention, and included a Bristol Stool Scale, a 3-week bowel diary, the St Mark's score, the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale (FIQL) and a bowel satisfaction score.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients completed the study. At baseline 50 reported episodes of urge incontinence, while 11 did not report FI episodes because they rarely left home to avoid leakage. The Bristol score improved to normal stools in 65.6% of patients after treatment. Bowel diaries showed a statistically significant reduction in the number of bowel movements, urge episodes, urge fecal incontinence episodes and soiling per week. The St Mark's score and the bowel satisfaction score significantly improved after methylcellulose and overall deferment time also increased. FIQL significantly improved in two subdomains (lifestyle, coping/behavior). Thirty-one patients (51.7%) were discharged with methylcellulose as the only treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

FI may significantly improve with methylcellulose in selected cases. Assessment of fecal consistency and initial treatment with methylcellulose could be started at primary care level to reduce the need for specialist referral.

Clinical measurement of gastrointestinal motility and function: who, when and which test?

Symptoms related to abnormal gastrointestinal motility and function are common. Oropharyngeal and oesophageal dysphagia, heartburn, bloating, abdominal pain and alterations in bowel habits are among the most frequent reasons for seeking medical attention from internists or general practitioners and are also common reasons for referral to gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons. However, the nonspecific nature of gastrointestinal symptoms, the absence of a definitive diagnosis on routine investigations (such as endoscopy, radiology or blood tests) and the lack of specific treatments make disease management challenging. Advances in technology have driven progress in the understanding of many of these conditions. This Review serves as an introduction to a series of Consensus Statements on the clinical measurements of gastrointestinal motility, function and sensitivity. A structured, evidence-based approach to the initial assessment and empirical treatment of patients presenting with gastrointestinal symptoms is discussed, followed by an outline of the contribution of modern physiological measurement on the management of patients in whom the cause of symptoms has not been identified with other tests. Discussions include the indications for and utility of high-resolution manometry, ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring, gastric emptying studies, breath tests and investigations of anorectal structure and function in day-to-day practice and clinical management.