Physician knowledge of Rome symptom criteria for irritable bowel syndrome is poor among non-gastroenterologists

Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices Regarding the Rome IV Criteria for the Diagnosis of Irritable Bowel Syndrome Among Primary Healthcare Physicians in Saudi Arabia

INTRODUCTION

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) presents a significant challenge in the medical field due to its complex nature as a functional gastrointestinal illness (FGID) without clear biological markers. Diagnosis often involves ruling out other potential causes, leading to frustration for patients and difficulty in effective treatment. Given its high prevalence among FGIDs, primary healthcare (PHC) physicians play a crucial role in its initial assessment and management.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study surveyed 623 PHC physicians using a structured, closed-ended questionnaire. Employing a multistage sampling approach, physicians were selected from various provinces and cities in Saudi Arabia. Clusters within these cities were also sampled.

RESULTS

The research revealed that a majority of physicians (n = 411, 66%) exhibited a strong awareness of the Rome IV criteria, essential for diagnosing IBS. This awareness correlated significantly with variables, such as age, nationality, marital status, specialty, classifications, and years of experience.

CONCLUSION

PHC physicians in the study demonstrated a commendable level of familiarity with the Rome IV criteria for diagnosing IBS. Their knowledge was particularly robust concerning symptoms outlined in these criteria. However, there is room for improvement in their understanding, attitude, and application of the Rome IV guidelines in practice. Addressing these gaps could enhance the overall management of IBS cases by these physicians.

A Cross-Sectional Study about Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices among Primary Health Care Physicians in Jazan Province, Saudi Arabia, Regarding Rome IV Criteria for Diagnosis of Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Background and objectives: Most individuals with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) are diagnosed by primary health care (PHC) physicians. However, a significant percentage of patients remain undiagnosed or misdiagnosed owing to the lack of knowledge or a systematic strategy regarding the use of ROME IV criteria for the diagnosis of IBS. Thus, in this study, we aimed to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practices among primary health care physicians in Jazan Province, Saudi Arabia, regarding ROME IV criteria for the diagnosis of IBS. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a pretested self-administered questionnaire that determines participants' sociodemographic data and measures knowledge about ROME IV criteria, targeting PHC physicians in Jazan Province, Saudi Arabia. Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) v.23. Results: We included 200 participants, and the majority of participants in our study (approximately 78%) were aware of the ROME IV diagnostic criteria for IBS; this awareness was associated with age, nationality, specialty, and classification. The participants' mean level of knowledge was 4.30 (out of 6). However, knowledge was higher among Saudi and family medicine doctors in this study, as compared to non-Saudi and doctors of other specialties. More than two-thirds of participants who were aware of ROME IV criteria thought that they are sufficient to diagnose IBS; however, only 47.5% of physicians reported using ROME IV frequently in their daily practice. Conclusions: Most of the participants of this study are aware of ROME IV criteria, and better knowledge was noted among Saudi and family medicine physicians. About 70% thought that ROME IV criteria are effective enough to diagnose IBS, and only about half of the participants use ROME IV criteria in their practice. Therefore, due to its high prevalence in the region, further efforts are required to disseminate basic knowledge and improve attitudes and practices related to ROME IV criteria among PHC physicians of all specialties.

Translational Gap between Guidelines and Clinical Medicine: The Viewpoint of Italian General Practitioners in the Management of IBS

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) guidelines are generally developed by experts, with the possibility of a translational gap in clinical medicine. The aim of our study was to assess an Italian group of general practitioners (GPs) for their awareness and use of criteria for the diagnosis and management of IBS. For this purpose, a survey was carried out involving 235 GPs, divided into two groups according to their years of activity: 65 “junior general practitioners” (JGPs) (≤10 years) and 170 “senior general practitioners” (SGPs) (>10 years). JGPs were more familiar with the Rome IV Criteria and Bristol Scale than SGPs. Abdominal pain, bowel movement frequency and bloating were the symptoms most frequently used to make a diagnosis. The most probable causes of IBS were reported to be abnormal gastrointestinal motility and psychological triggers. SGPs reported more frequently than JGPs that challenging management and patient’s request were motivations for a gastroenterological consultation. The practice of clinical medicine is still far from the guidelines provided by the specialists. Abdominal pain related to defecation and changes in bowel frequency are considered to be the more important symptoms for IBS diagnosis, but most GPs, both JGPs and SGPs, like to consider abdominal bloating as another useful symptom. Involving both gastroenterologists and GPs in developing shared guidelines would be highly desirable in order to improve IBS management strategies in everyday clinical practice.

Creation of a Multispecialty Clinic for Patients with Central Sensitization-Based Chronic Pain Conditions

Objective

To design and evaluate, through a human-centered design approach, a multispeciality clinic for patients with central sensitization syndromes that combined virtual previsit consultations, traditional face-to-face appointments, and technology-enabled educational programming.

Patients and Methods

Patients with suspected fibromyalgia and chronic abdominal pain were seen in a multispecialty practice, and the performance of the clinic was evaluated against a contemporary cohort. Quantitative and qualitative evaluation measures included team estimates of time spent on care-related tasks, physician rank of alignment of patient need with clinic design, major appointment changes, and nonvisit care tasks. Members of the care team also evaluated strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to the success of the clinic.

Results

The pilot clinic was operated from April 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021, and included 34 patients with suspected fibromyalgia/chronic abdominal pain. During the pilot period, physicians ranked the value of the virtual previsit consultations in providing care as 7.5 on a scale of 0 to 10 and reported an average of 50 minutes in preparation for the appointment, execution of the appointment, and postvisit documentation. We did not observe substantial differences in the number of added appointments or messages received within the patient portal when compared with a comparison cohort. Patients who participated in the combination nurse educator–led and digital education program provided positive feedback about their experience.

Conclusion

Our clinic model provides a framework for the treatment of patients with debilitating centrally sensitized conditions and future expansion of virtual care delivery models to better meet patient care and educational needs.

Defining Optimal Care for Functional Gut Disorders - Multi-Disciplinary Versus Standard Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol

BACKGROUND

Functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) are the commonest reason for gastroenterological consultation, with patients usually seen by a specialist working in isolation. There is a wealth of evidence testifying to the benefit provided by dieticians, behavioral therapists, hypnotherapists and psychotherapists in treating these conditions, yet they rarely form a part of the therapeutic team, and these treatment modalities are rarely offered as part of the therapeutic management. There has been little examination of different models of care for FGIDs. We hypothesize that multi-disciplinary integrated care is superior to standard specialist-based care in the treatment of functional gut disorders.

METHODS

The "MANTRA" (Multidisciplinary Treatment for Functional Gut Disorders) study compares comprehensive multi-disciplinary outpatient care with standard hospital outpatient care. Consecutive new referrals to the gastroenterology and colorectal outpatient clinics of a single secondary and tertiary care hospital of patients with an FGID, defined by the Rome IV criteria, will be included. Patients will be prospectively randomized 2:1 to multi-disciplinary (gastroenterologist, gut-hypnotherapist, psychiatrist, behavioral therapist ('biofeedback') and dietician) or standard care (gastroenterologist or colorectal surgeon). Patients are assessed up to 12 months after completing treatment. The primary outcome is an improvement on a global assessment scale at the end of treatment. Symptoms, quality of life, psychological well-being, and healthcare costs are secondary outcome measures.

DISCUSSION

There have been few studies examining how best to deliver care for functional gut disorders. The MANTRA study will define the clinical and cost benefits of two different models of care for these highly prevalent disorders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.govNCT03078634 Registered on Clinicaltrials.gov, completed recruitment, registered on March 13th 2017. Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval has been received by the St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne human research ethics committee (HREC-A 138/16). The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences. Protocol version 1.2.

Celiac disease is uncommon in irritable bowel syndrome in the USA

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Routine serologic testing for celiac disease (CD) may be useful in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients, but this is controversial. We aimed to compare the prevalence of unrecognized CD in a large cohort of patients with and without IBS.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

This is a family case-control IBS study conducted at a single US academic medical center. Stored serum and DNA were available. Tissue transglutaminase (TTg) immunoglobulin A was performed, followed by indirect immunofluorescence testing for endomysial antibodies with positive or weakly positive TTg results. Individuals were considered to have CD if both results were positive. χ and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare prevalence between the two groups.

RESULTS

Serum samples were studied from 533 cases and 531 controls. In all, 80% of participants were female, with a median age of 50 years; 65% of cases and 0% controls met the Rome criteria for IBS. Previous serological testing for CD had occurred in 142 (27%) cases and 13 (2%) controls, but none had CD on subsequent testing. Six (1.1%) cases versus five (0.9%) controls had positive or weakly positive TTg test. Six cases (1.1%) versus three (0.6%) controls were confirmed to have CD by endomysial antibody (P=0.51).

CONCLUSION

No difference in the prevalence of CD between patients with IBS and patients without IBS at a tertiary medical center was observed. Our findings do not support routine celiac serologic or genetic testing in patients with IBS in all US populations.

Comparison of Symptoms, Healthcare Utilization, and Treatment in Diagnosed and Undiagnosed Individuals With Diarrhea-Predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome

OBJECTIVES

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a functional bowel disorder characterized by symptoms including abdominal pain and altered bowel function. Up to 75% of individuals with IBS may be undiagnosed. The aim of this study was to characterize symptoms, healthcare utilization, and treatments in populations with both diagnosed and undiagnosed IBS.

METHODS

An online survey was conducted to compare gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, healthcare visits, well-being, symptom management, and treatment satisfaction in individuals with and without medically diagnosed IBS (Rome III criteria). Symptom severity, disruptiveness, and treatment satisfaction were rated using a 7-point scale. Adjustments to daily life were determined by predefined survey responses.

RESULTS

A total of 1,924 individuals with a history of GI symptoms were eligible and completed the survey. Of these, 1,094 individuals (56.9%) met the criteria for IBS; 830 individuals (43.1%) had no medical diagnosis of IBS despite meeting diagnostic criteria. Most participants received a diagnosis from either gastroenterologists (45%) or primary care physicians (42%). A greater percentage of diagnosed patients had severe GI symptoms (score ≥6) vs. undiagnosed individuals (16% vs. 8%, respectively; P<0.05); diagnosed patients were more likely to report that GI symptoms adversely affected their quality of life. Approximately 40% of participants received IBS-related treatment from primary care physicians; 26% and 43% of diagnosed and undiagnosed individuals, respectively, were not receiving treatment for GI symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Many individuals with IBS-related symptoms have not been medically diagnosed with IBS. IBS-related symptoms impact quality of life, yet more than one-third of individuals are not receiving treatment for IBS.

Irritable bowel syndrome: Physicians' awareness and patients' experience

AIM: To study if and how physicians use the irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) diagnostic criteria and to assess treatment strategies in IBS patients.

METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 191 physicians regarding IBS criteria, diagnostic methods and treatment. Furthermore, 94 patients who were diagnosed with IBS underwent telephone interview.

RESULTS: A total of 80/191 (41.9%) physicians responded to the survey. Overall, 13 patients were diagnosed monthly with IBS by specialists in gastroenterology (SGs) and 2.5 patients by general practitioners (GPs). All the SGs knew of the criteria to diagnose IBS, as did 46/70 (65.7%) GPs. Seventy-nine percent used the patient’s history, 38% used a physical examination, and 38% exclusion of other diseases to diagnose IBS. Only 18/80 (22.5%) physicians used specific IBS criteria. Of the patients interviewed, 59/94 (62.8%) knew they had experienced IBS. Two out of five patients knew IBS and had seen a physician because of IBS symptoms. Half of those received a diagnosis of IBS. A total of 13% were satisfied with treatment. IBS affected daily activities in 43% of cases.

CONCLUSION: Half of the patients with IBS who consulted a physician received a diagnosis. Awareness and knowledge of diagnostic criteria for IBS differ between SGs and GPs.

Alosetron for severe diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome: improving patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common gastrointestinal disorder often diagnosed and managed by primary care physicians (PCPs). Despite the high prevalence of IBS, symptom severity is often underappreciated and inadequately managed. The goal of this review is to discern IBS treatment gaps and identify opportunities for improving its management in the primary care setting, as well as describe the most current clinical experience with alosetron, a targeted treatment for severe diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D) in women.

SCOPE

PubMed was searched for English language articles using combinations of the following key words: 'irritable bowel syndrome,' 'diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome,' 'diagnosis,' 'guidelines,' 'general practice,' 'primary care,' 'quality of life,' 'burden,' 'prevalence,' 'patient satisfaction,' 'patient survey,' 'severe,' 'severity,' and 'alosetron.'

FINDINGS

Establishing the diagnosis of IBS in primary care represents a clinical challenge for many healthcare professionals. While many patients seek care for IBS symptoms in the primary care setting, evidence shows that PCPs are often unaware of established diagnostic criteria for IBS. Establishing the severity of IBS is also problematic, given the lack of consensus guidelines defining severe IBS, which in turn complicates treatment decisions. Severe IBS is often inferred after inadequate response to conventional agents; the level of disease impact on quality of life and patient functioning also defines severity. The selective 5-HT(3) antagonist alosetron has been shown to provide improvement across multiple symptom domains, and the incidence of adverse events continues to be low since the implementation of the Prescribing Program for Lotronex. Alosetron is the only agent approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for treatment of severe IBS-D in women.

CONCLUSION

PCPs often are required to evaluate and treat suspected IBS. The diagnosis and management of IBS in the primary care setting could be optimized through the use of published diagnostic criteria, adequate assessment of symptom severity, and a thorough knowledge of the therapeutic agents that have provided evidence of effectiveness. In the subset of women who suffer from IBS-D, targeted serotonergic therapy with alosetron has been shown to provide symptom relief across multiple domains, including improvement of the patient's quality of life.

Alosetron for severe diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome: safety and efficacy in perspective

Irritable bowel syndrome affects 5-10% of North Americans, with an estimated one-third having a diarrhea-predominant form. Alosetron hydrochloride (Lotronex) is a serotonin receptor type 3 antagonist approved in early 2000 for use in women with diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D). Initial use was widespread, but infrequent serious adverse events of ischemic colitis and severe constipation-related complications prompted alosetron's voluntary withdrawal from the US market in November 2000. Unprecedented public request prompted its reintroduction in 2002 under a Risk Management Plan, including a more restricted indication and a Prescribing Program for Lotronex. Despite these measures, the use of alosetron has been very limited since its reintroduction. Possible deterrents to its use include concerns over safety and the possible medical-legal implications raised by the Risk Management Plan. It is also possible that changes in the natural history and/or diagnosis of IBS-D have reduced the target population. Given the unique regulatory history of alosetron, these issues continue to engender controversy. This article profiles these concerns and reviews the pharmacology, clinical efficacy and safety, and post-marketing experience with alosetron. Myths and misconceptions related to alosetron use, or lack thereof, are addressed to provide the reader with the evidence needed to make informed treatment decisions for their female patients with severe IBS-D.

[Diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome]

The diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a clinical diagnosis, based on the Rome III criteria. The identification of alarm features (red flags), associated with an organic digestive pathology is a key point during the initial screening. Age over 50 years, blood in feces, and diarrhea seem to be the three most specific red flags. Biological and morphological examinations must be performed cautiously; their profitability is low in patients with Rome criteria. In the majority of clinical situations encountered in daily clinical practice, a positive diagnosis of IBS can be made.

What do patients with irritable bowel syndrome know about their disorder and how do they use their knowledge?

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common disorder for which many patients experience a lack of information. By using a questionnaire, we aimed to explore how much knowledge these patients have, and what they find important to receive information and explanation about. Eighty-six subjects with IBS diagnosed in primary care and referred to a gastroenterologist completed the questionnaire before meeting the gastroenterologist. Approximately 80% had knowledge about IBS, although 55% stated that their knowledge was "just vague." According to visual analogue scale measurement, knowledge as well as satisfaction with knowledge was poor. Most patients had correct knowledge about IBS. Only 15% considered themselves to be thoroughly informed, and 24% stated that they had not received any information at all. The most important issue they wanted information about was what to do to improve symptoms. Many IBS patients seem to have correct knowledge about IBS; however, they do not consider themselves to have that knowledge, and therefore probably do not feel confident in using their knowledge. Encouraging and supporting patients with IBS could contribute to an increased ability to use their knowledge in a more appropriate way.

Irritable bowel syndrome: novel views on the epidemiology and potential risk factors

Symptoms consistent with the irritable bowel syndrome are remarkably frequent around the world. Irritable bowel syndrome prevalence ranges from 2.1% to 22%, depending on criteria used. Women are more frequently affected than men, but the reasons remain obscure; irritable bowel syndrome occurs in all age groups but there appears to be a modest decline in prevalence with advancing age again for unknown reasons. The incidence of irritable bowel syndrome per year has been estimated at approximately 1.5% in community subjects; annually only 0.2% of population will be diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome. The natural history of irritable bowel syndrome is characterized by symptomatic flare ups and by a high rate of transition to other functional gastrointestinal diseases over the long term. Well recognized risk factors for irritable bowel syndrome include psychological distress and gastroenteritis. However, the association of psychological distress in some cases may reflect confounding factors and might be explained at least in part by cytokine production. Familial aggregation of irritable bowel syndrome occurs, and while the environment is key, twin studies generally support a genetic component in irritable bowel syndrome explaining up to 20% of the variability. Prior surgery may increase risk of irritable bowel syndrome. Early childhood trauma may be important; a low birth weight, nasogastric suction at birth, childhood abuse, and low socioeconomic status may carry an increased risk of suffering with irritable bowel syndrome as an adult. The role of diet remains uncertain but under-studied.

Functional dyspepsia: not all roads seem to lead to rome

BACKGROUND

The Rome criteria have been introduced to create order in the heterogeneity of functional dyspepsia. The applicability of these symptom-based classification systems remains controversial.

GOAL

To evaluate the successive Rome criteria for functional dyspepsia in a large pool of patients with endoscopically verified functional dyspepsia.

STUDY

Patients referred to a secondary care district hospital were asked to fill out a questionnaire on gastrointestinal symptoms 2 weeks before upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patients were classified according to the Rome I, II, and III criteria for functional dyspepsia.

RESULTS

Nine hundred and twelve (70%) patients had no organic disorder explaining their symptoms. According to the Rome I, II, and III criteria, 371 (41%), 735 (81%), and 551 (60%) of these patients had functional dyspepsia, respectively. Twenty-five percent of patients had functional dyspepsia according to all 3 Rome criteria, whereas 15% was not classifiable at all. Forty-four percent and 42% of the patients, respectively, had epigastric pain syndrome and postprandial distress syndrome according to the Rome III criteria; however, 26% of all patients met both criteria and 40% was not classified at all.

CONCLUSIONS

The symptom-based Rome classification of functional dyspepsia does not lead to an easily applicable and consistent system that is useful in clinical practice or scientific research.

Exploring the agreement between diagnostic criteria for IBS in primary care in Greece

Background

Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) is frequently diagnosed in primary care. Its diagnosis is based on diagnostic criteria but their use is limited in primary care.

We aimed to assess the diagnostic agreement between the older (Manning's and Rome II) and the new (Rome III) criteria for the diagnosis of IBS in primary care in Greece.

Methods

Medical records of 5 Health Centers in rural Crete, Greece, were reviewed for a four-year period and patients with the diagnosis of IBS were invited to a structured interview. Kappa agreement of the Rome III criteria with the criteria of Manning and Rome II was estimated. One hundred and twenty three patients were eligible for interview and 67 (54.5%) participated. Forty-six (69%) fulfilled the Manning, 32(48%) the Rome II, and 16(24%) the Rome III criteria. Twenty-seven (40%) patients were identified as IBS according to the questionnaire for the identification of functional gastrointestinal diseases (FGIDs). The agreement of Rome III with Manning criteria was poor (kappa = 0.25). The agreement between the FGIDs questionnaire and the Manning, Rome II and Rome III criteria was: kappa = 0.30, 0.31 and 0.24 respectively. Moderate agreement was found between the Rome II and III criteria (kappa = 0.51).

Conclusion

Questionnaires and criteria deriving from expert's consensus meetings or tertiary hospitals are not easy to apply in rural primary care where symptoms are often underestimated by patients and complicated questions can be confusing.

Irritable bowel syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a disease of unclear, complex pathophysiology characterised by abdominal pain and discomfort and altered bowel activity. It affects an estimated 10-15% of individuals worldwide and has a large impact on quality of life (QOL) and both direct and indirect healthcare costs. Symptoms of IBS are usually triggered by disruption of gastrointestinal (GI) function secondary to infection, dietary factors, lifestyle changes or psychological stress. While most currently available pharmacological treatments of IBS focus on symptomatic treatment of the syndrome, agents that attempt to address the pathophysiology of the disease, in particular the role of serotonin, have received much attention in recent years. However, there is growing concern that serotonergic agents as a class may be associated with rare, but serious, episodes of ischaemic colitis, with several cases of this complication having been reported in association with use of serotonergic agents that have reached the market. Thus, there remains an important need for safe and effective agents that treat the symptoms of IBS. Otilonium bromide, a spasmolytic agent, has been widely used worldwide and has been found to be effective and safe for managing abdominal pain. Clinical trials indicate that it improves baseline abdominal pain and distension, and is particularly effective in reducing diarrhoea. Combining otilonium bromide with benzodiazepines, such as diazepam, may improve the efficacy of the agent with respect to GI symptoms, while also treating underlying anxiety disorders. More research is required to confirm the efficacy and mechanisms of action associated with this combination therapy in IBS. Safety data from clinical trials and postmarketing sources indicate that otilonium bromide is well tolerated, with a safety profile comparable to placebo in clinical trials and only two reported cases of adverse reactions (urticaria) among 10-year postmarketing data. This article reviews the pathophysiology and treatment of IBS with a particular focus on the role of otilonium bromide in the management of this condition.