Psychological Considerations in the Dietary Management of Patients With DGBI

Organization of Neurogastroenterology and Motility units with a multidisciplinary, patient-centered perspective

Neurogastroenterology and Motility is a Gastroenterology subspecialty dealing with the management of gastrointestinal (GI) motor diseases and disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI). Both types of conditions may impair the nutritional status of patients - In the case of motility disorders, because deficient gastrointestinal motility may impair appropriate food digestion and absorption; in DGBI because development of gastrointestinal symptoms may impair appropriate patient nutrition. In both cases, different studies have shown that patients start restrictive diets on their own, without supervision of a dietician, which leads to nutritional deficits in many cases. Likewise, psychological factors like stressful situations or anxiety may trigger gastrointestinal symptoms in these patients, mainly in those with DGBI. Recent studies comparing a patient-centered approach that includes medical treatment, dietary modifications, and behavioural interventions with gastroenterologist-only standard care have shown a greater proportion of improved symptoms, psychological status, and quality of life, as well as reduced costs in patients allocated to the multidisciplinary treatment arm. In conclusion, there is growing evidence in favour of dietary and behavioural interventions by specialized professionals, coupled with appropriate medical evaluation and treatment by a gastroenterologist. Hence the importance of developing reference units in which comprehensive, individualized management may be offered. Multidisciplinary models improve clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction, which should result in a reduction of direct and indirect costs.  .

Gastrointestinal diagnoses in patients with eating disorders: A retrospective cohort study 2010-2020

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Gastrointestinal (GI) disorders are common in patients with eating disorders. However, the temporal relationship between GI and eating disorder symptoms has not been explored. We aimed to evaluate GI disorders among patients with eating disorders, their relative timing, and the relationship between GI diagnoses and eating disorder remission.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with an eating disorder diagnosis who had a GI encounter from 2010 to 2020. GI diagnoses and timing of eating disorder onset were abstracted from chart review. Coders applied DSM-5 criteria for eating disorders at the time of GI consult to determine eating disorder remission status.

RESULTS

Of 344 patients with an eating disorder diagnosis and GI consult, the majority (255/344, 74.2%) were diagnosed with an eating disorder prior to GI consult (preexisting eating disorder). GI diagnoses categorized as functional/motility disorders were most common among the cohort (57.3%), particularly in those with preexisting eating disorders (62.5%). 113 (44.3%) patients with preexisting eating disorders were not in remission at GI consult, which was associated with being underweight (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04-0.46, p < 0.001) and increasing number of GI diagnoses (OR 0.47 per diagnosis, 95% CI 0.26-0.85, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Eating disorder symptoms precede GI consult for most patients, particularly in functional/motility disorders. As almost half of eating disorder patients are not in remission at GI consult. GI providers have an important role in screening for eating disorders. Further prospective research is needed to understand the complex relationship between eating disorders and GI symptoms.

Postprandial symptoms in disorders of gut-brain interaction and their potential as a treatment target

Postprandial, or meal-related, symptoms, such as abdominal pain, early satiation, fullness or bloating, are often reported by patients with disorders of gut-brain interaction, including functional dyspepsia (FD) or irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We propose that postprandial symptoms arise via a distinct pathophysiological process. A physiological or psychological insult, for example, acute enteric infection, leads to loss of tolerance to a previously tolerated oral food antigen. This enables interaction of both the microbiota and the food antigen itself with the immune system, causing a localised immunological response, with activation of eosinophils and mast cells, and release of inflammatory mediators, including histamine and cytokines. These have more widespread systemic effects, including triggering nociceptive nerves and altering mood. Dietary interventions, including a diet low in fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyols, elimination of potential food antigens or gluten, IgG food sensitivity diets or salicylate restriction may benefit some patients with IBS or FD. This could be because the restriction of these foods or dietary components modulates this pathophysiological process. Similarly, drugs including proton pump inhibitors, histamine-receptor antagonists, mast cell stabilisers or even tricyclic or tetracyclic antidepressants, which have anti-histaminergic actions, all of which are potential treatments for FD and IBS, act on one or more of these mechanisms. It seems unlikely that food antigens driving intestinal immune activation are the entire explanation for postprandial symptoms in FD and IBS. In others, fermentation of intestinal carbohydrates, with gas release altering reflex responses, adverse reactions to food chemicals, central mechanisms or nocebo effects may dominate. However, if the concept that postprandial symptoms arise from food antigens driving an immune response in the gastrointestinal tract in a subset of patients is correct, it is paradigm-shifting, because if the choice of treatment were based on one or more of these therapeutic targets, patient outcomes may be improved.

Translation of the nine item avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder screen (NIAS) questionnaire in French (NIAS-Fr)

BACKGROUND

The Nine Item Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID) Screen (NIAS) questionnaire is originally available in English. Given the significant overlap of ARFID-like symptoms in gastrointestinal (GI) diseases, ARFID screening becomes crucial in these patient populations. Consequently, the translation of the NIAS questionnaire into French is necessary for its utilization in French-speaking countries.

METHODS

Clinical experts in neuro-gastroenterology and dietetics from four medical centres in two French-speaking countries (France and Belgium) took part in a well-structured questionnaire translation procedure. This process involved six steps before final approval: translation from English to French, backward translation, comparison between the original and retranslated versions, testing the translated version on patients, making corrections based on patient feedback, and testing the corrected version on an additional sample of patients.

KEY RESULTS

The NIAS questionnaire in French (NIAS-Fr) was tested on 18 outpatients across the involved centres. For the majority of native French-speaking patients, the translated questionnaire was well understood and clear. After incorporating two relevant modifications suggested by the patients, the translated questionnaire was approved through testing on an additional sample of patients.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

The involvement of two French-speaking countries was crucial for the harmonization and cultural adaptation of the questionnaire. As a result, the NIAS-Fr is now available for use in 54 French-speaking countries, serving approximately 321 million French speakers across five continents for screening ARFID, for both clinical and research purposes.

Prevalence, characteristics, and correlates of probable avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder among adult respondents to the National Eating Disorders Association online screen: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) is a serious, albeit under-researched, feeding or eating disorder. This exploratory study utilized data from adult respondents to the National Eating Disorders Association online eating disorder screen to validate items assessing the presence of ARFID and examine the prevalence, clinical characteristics, and correlates of a positive ARFID screen.

METHODS

Among 50,082 adult screen respondents between January 2022 and January 2023, the prevalence of a positive ARFID screen was calculated. Chi-square tests and t-tests compared demographics, eating disorder attitudes and behaviors, suicidal ideation, current eating disorder treatment status, and eating disorder treatment-seeking intentions between respondents with possible ARFID and other eating disorder diagnostic and risk categories. Clinical characteristics of respondents with possible ARFID were also examined.

RESULTS

2378 (4.7%) adult respondents screened positive for ARFID. Respondents with possible ARFID tended to be younger, male, and have lower household income, and were less likely to be White and more likely to be Hispanic/Latino than most other diagnostic/risk groups. They had lower weight/shape concerns and eating disorder behaviors than most other diagnoses and higher BMI than those with AN. 35% reported suicidal ideation, 47% reported intentions to seek treatment for an eating disorder, and 2% reported currently being in treatment. The most common clinical feature of ARFID was lack of interest in eating (80%), followed by food sensory avoidance (55%) and avoidance of food due to fear of aversive consequences (31%).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this study indicated that ARFID was prevalent among adult screen respondents and more common among individuals who were younger, male, non-White, Hispanic, and lower income relative to those with other eating disorders, at risk for an eating disorder, or at low risk. Individuals with possible ARFID frequently reported suicidal ideation and were rarely in treatment for an eating disorder. Further research is urgently needed to improve advances in the assessment and treatment of ARFID and improve access to care in order to prevent prolonged illness duration.

The Crohn's Disease Exclusion Diet: A Comprehensive Review of Evidence, Implementation Strategies, Practical Guidance, and Future Directions

Dietary therapy is increasingly recognized for the management of Crohn's disease (CD) over recent years, including the use of exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) as first-line therapy for pediatric CD according to current guidelines. The Crohn's disease exclusion diet (CDED) is a whole-food diet designed to reduce exposure to dietary components that are potentially pro-inflammatory, mediated by negative effects on the gut microbiota, immune response, and the intestinal barrier. The CDED has emerged as a valid alternative to EEN with cumulative evidence, including randomized controlled trials, supporting use for induction of remission and possibly maintenance in children and adults. We gathered a group of multidisciplinary experts, including pediatric and adult gastroenterologists, inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) expert dietitians, and a psychologist to discuss the evidence, identify gaps, and provide insights into improving the use of CDED based on a comprehensive review of CDED literature and professional experience. This article reviews the management of CDED in both children and adults, long-term aspects of CDED, indications and contraindications, selecting the best candidates, identifying challenges with CDED, globalization, the role of the multidisciplinary team, especially of dietitian, and future directions. We concluded that CDED is an established dietary therapy that could serve as an alternative to EEN in many pediatric and adult cases, especially with mild to moderate disease. In severe disease, complicated phenotypes, or with extraintestinal involvement, CDED should be considered on a case-by-case basis, according to physician and dietitians' discretion. More studies are warranted to assess the efficacy of CDED in different scenarios.

Irritable bowel syndrome and mental health comorbidity - approach to multidisciplinary management

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) affects 5-10% of the global population. Up to one-third of people with IBS also experience anxiety or depression. Gastrointestinal and psychological symptoms both drive health-care use in people with IBS, but psychological comorbidity seems to be more important for long-term quality of life. An integrated care approach that addresses gastrointestinal symptoms with nutrition and brain-gut behaviour therapies is considered the gold standard. However, best practice for the treatment of individuals with IBS who have a comorbid psychological condition is unclear. Given the rising prevalence of mental health disorders, discussion of the challenges of implementing therapy for people with IBS and anxiety and depression is critical. In this Review, we draw upon our expertise in gastroenterology, nutrition science and psychology to highlight common challenges that arise when managing patients with IBS and co-occurring anxiety and depression, and provide recommendations for tailoring clinical assessment and treatment. We provide best practice recommendations, including dietary and behavioural interventions that could be applied by non-specialists and clinicians working outside an integrated care model.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Evaluation and Management of Belching, Abdominal Bloating, and Distention: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

Belching, bloating, and abdominal distention are all highly prevalent gastrointestinal symptoms and account for some of the most common reasons for patient visits to outpatient gastroenterology practices. These symptoms are often debilitating, affecting patients' quality of life, and contributing to work absenteeism. Belching and bloating differ in their pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management, and there is limited evidence available for their various treatments. Therefore, the purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Clinical Practice Update is to provide best practice advice based on both controlled trials and observational data for clinicians covering clinical features, diagnostics, and management considerations that include dietary, gut-directed behavioral, and drug therapies.

METHODS

This Expert Review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the Clinical Practice Updates Committee and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. These best practice advice statements were drawn from a review of the published literature based on clinical trials, the more robust observational studies, and from expert opinion. Because systematic reviews were not performed, these best practice advice statements do not carry formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Clinical history and physical examination findings and impedance pH monitoring can help to differentiate between gastric and supragastric belching. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Treatment options for supragastric belching may include brain-gut behavioral therapies, either separately or in combination, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, diaphragmatic breathing, speech therapy, and central neuromodulators. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Rome IV criteria should be used to diagnose primary abdominal bloating and distention. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Carbohydrate enzyme deficiencies may be ruled out with dietary restriction and/or breath testing. In a small subset of at-risk patients, small bowel aspiration and glucose- or lactulose-based hydrogen breath testing may be used to evaluate for small intestinal bacterial overgrowth. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Serologic testing may rule out celiac disease in patients with bloating and, if serologies are positive, a small bowel biopsy should be done to confirm the diagnosis. A gastroenterology dietitian should be part of the multidisciplinary approach to care for patients with celiac disease and nonceliac gluten sensitivity. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Abdominal imaging and upper endoscopy should be ordered in patients with alarm features, recent worsening symptoms, or an abnormal physical examination only. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Gastric emptying studies should not be ordered routinely for bloating and distention, but may be considered if nausea and vomiting are present. Whole gut motility and radiopaque transit studies should not be ordered unless other additional and treatment-refractory lower gastrointestinal symptoms exist to warrant testing for neuromyopathic disorders. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: In patients with abdominal bloating and distention thought to be related to constipation or difficult evacuation, anorectal physiology testing is suggested to rule out a pelvic floor disorder. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: When dietary modifications are needed (eg, low-fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyols diet), a gastroenterology dietitian should preferably monitor treatment. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Probiotics should not be used to treat abdominal bloating and distention. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Biofeedback therapy may be effective for bloating and distention when a pelvic floor disorder is identified. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: Central neuromodulators (eg, antidepressants) are used to treat bloating and abdominal distention by reducing visceral hypersensitivity, raising sensation threshold, and improving psychological comorbidities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: Medications used to treat constipation should be considered for treating bloating if constipation symptoms are present. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Psychological therapies, such as hypnotherapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, and other brain-gut behavior therapies may be used to treat patients with bloating and distention. BEST PRACTICE 15: Diaphragmatic breathing and central neuromodulators are used to treat abdominophrenic dyssynergia.

The Intersection of Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction With Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder

High rates of overlap exist between disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI) and eating disorders, for which common interventions conceptually conflict. There is particularly increasing recognition of eating disorders not centered on shape/weight concerns, specifically avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) in gastroenterology treatment settings. The significant comorbidity between DGBI and ARFID highlights its importance, with 13% to 40% of DGBI patients meeting full criteria for or having clinically significant symptoms of ARFID. Notably, exclusion diets may put some patients at risk for developing ARFID and continued food avoidance may perpetuate preexisting ARFID symptoms. In this review, we introduce the provider and researcher to ARFID and describe the possible risk and maintenance pathways between ARFID and DGBI. As DGBI treatment recommendations may put some patients at risk for developing ARFID, we offer recommendations for practical treatment management including evidence-based diet treatments, treatment risk counseling, and routine diet monitoring. When implemented thoughtfully, DGBI and ARFID treatments can be complementary rather than conflicting.

Diet-microbiota interaction in irritable bowel syndrome: looking beyond the low-FODMAP approach

BACKGROUND

Diet is one of the main modulators of the gut microbiota, and dietary patterns are decisive for gut-microbiota-related diseases, including irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The low-FODMAP diet (LFD) is commonly used to treat IBS, but its long-term effects on microbiota, symptoms and quality of life (QoL) are unclear. Alternative dietary strategies promoting beneficial gut microbiota, combined with reduced symptoms and improved QoL, are therefore of interest.

AIMS

To review current evidence on the diet-microbiota-interaction as a modulator of IBS pathophysiology, and dietary management of IBS, with particular emphasis on strategies targeting the gut microbiota, beyond the LFD.

METHODS

Literature was identified through PubMed-searches with relevant keywords.

RESULTS

Dietary patterns with a low intake of processed foods and a high intake of plants, such as the Mediterranean diet, promote gut microbiota associated with beneficial health outcomes. In contrast, Western diets with a high intake of ultra-processed foods promote a microbiota associated with disease, including IBS. Increasing evidence points towards dietary strategies consistent with the Mediterranean diet being equal to the LFD in alleviating IBS-symptoms and having a less negative impact on QoL. Timing of food intake is suggested as a gut microbiota modulator, but little is known about its effects on IBS.

CONCLUSIONS

Dietary recommendations in IBS should aim to target the gut microbiota by focusing on improved dietary quality, considering the impact on both IBS-symptoms and QoL. Increased intake of whole foods combined with a regular meal pattern and limitation of ultra-processed foods can be beneficial strategies beyond the LFD.

Prevalence, Characteristics, and Correlates of Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder among Adult Respondents to the National Eating Disorders Association Online Screen: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background

Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) is a serious, albeit under-researched, feeding or eating disorder. This exploratory study utilized data from adult respondents to the National Eating Disorders Association (NEDA) online eating disorder screen to validate items assessing the presence of ARFID and examine the prevalence, clinical characteristics, and correlates of a positive ARFID screen compared to other probable eating disorder/risk categories.

Methods

Among 47,705 adult screen respondents between January 2022 and January 2023, the prevalence of a positive ARFID screen was calculated. Chi-square tests and t-tests compared demographics, eating disorder attitudes and behaviors, suicidal ideation, current eating disorder treatment status, and eating disorder treatment-seeking intentions between respondents with possible ARFID and other eating disorder diagnostic and risk categories. Clinical characteristics of respondents with possible ARFID were also examined.

Results

2,378 (5.0%) adult respondents screened positive for ARFID. Respondents with possible ARFID tended to be younger, male, and have lower household income, and were less likely to be White and more likely to be Hispanic/Latino than most other diagnostic/risk groups. They had lower weight/shape concerns and eating disorder behaviors than all other diagnoses but higher BMI than those with AN. 35% reported suicidal ideation, 47% reported intentions to seek treatment for an eating disorder, and 2% reported currently being in treatment. The most common clinical feature of ARFID was lack of interest in eating (80%), followed by food sensory avoidance (55%) and avoidance of food due to fear of aversive consequences (31%).

Conclusions

Findings from this study indicated that ARFID was prevalent among adult screen respondents and more common among individuals who were younger, male, non-White, Hispanic, and lower income relative to those with other eating disorders or at risk for an eating disorder. Individuals with possible ARFID frequently reported suicidal ideation and were rarely in treatment for an eating disorder. Further research is urgently needed to improve advances in the assessment and treatment of ARFID and improve access to care in order to prevent prolonged illness duration.

Development of a brief cognitive-behavioral treatment for avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder in the context of disorders of gut-brain interaction: Initial feasibility, acceptability, and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) symptoms are common (up to 40%) among adults with disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI), but treatments for this population (DGBI + ARFID) have yet to be evaluated. We aimed to identify initial feasibility, acceptability, and clinical effects of an exposure-based cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT) for adults with DGBI + ARFID.

METHODS

Patients (N = 14) received CBT as part of routine care in an outpatient gastroenterology clinic. A two-part investigation of the CBT included a retrospective evaluation of patients who were offered a flexible (8-10) session length and an observational prospective study of patients who were offered eight sessions. Feasibility benchmarks were ≥75% completion of sessions, quantitative measures (for treatment completers), and qualitative interviews. Acceptability was assessed with a benchmark of ≥70% patients reporting a posttreatment satisfaction scores ≥3 on 1-4 scale and with posttreatment qualitative interviews. Mixed model analysis explored signals of improvement in clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

All feasibility and acceptability benchmarks were achieved (and qualitative feedback revealed high satisfaction with the treatment and outcomes). There were improvements in clinical outcomes across treatment (all p's < .0001) with large effects for ARFID fear (-52%; Hedge's g = 1.5; 95% CI = 0.6, 2.5) and gastrointestinal-specific anxiety (-42%; Hedge's g = 1.0; 95% CI = 0.5, 16). Among those who needed to gain weight (n = 10), 94%-103% of expected weight gain goals were achieved.

DISCUSSION

Initial development and testing of a brief 8-session CBT protocol for DGBI + ARFID showed high feasibility, acceptability, and promising clinical improvements. Findings will inform an NIH Stage 1B randomized control trial.

PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE

While cognitive-behavioral treatments (CBTs) for ARFID have been created in outpatient feeding and eating disorder clinics, they have yet to be developed and refined for other clinic settings or populations. In line with the recommendations for behavioral treatment development, we conducted a two-part investigation of an exposure-based CBT for a patient population with high rates of ARFID-adults with disorders of gut-brain interaction (also known as functional gastrointestinal disorders). We found patients had high satisfaction with treatment and there were promising improvements for both gastrointestinal and ARFID outcomes. The refined treatment includes eight sessions delivered by a behavioral health care provider and the findings reported in this article will be studied next in an NIH Stage 1B randomized controlled trial.

History of trying exclusion diets and association with avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder in neurogastroenterology patients: A retrospective chart review

BACKGROUND

Exclusion diets for gastrointestinal symptom management have been hypothesized to be a risk factor for avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID; a non-body image-based eating disorder). In a retrospective study of pediatric and adult neurogastroenterology patients, we aimed to (1) identify the prevalence and characteristics of an exclusion diet history and (2) evaluate if an exclusion diet history was concurrently associated with the presence of ARFID symptoms.

METHODS

We conducted a chart review of 539 consecutive referrals (ages 6-90, 69% female) to adult (n = 410; January-December 2016) and pediatric (n = 129; January 2016-December 2018) neurogastroenterology clinics. Masked coders (n = 4) retrospectively applied DSM-5 criteria for ARFID and a separate coder assessed documentation of exclusion diet history. We excluded patients with no documentation of diet in the chart (n = 35) or who were not orally fed (n = 9).

RESULTS

Of 495 patients included, 194 (39%) had an exclusion diet history, and 118 (24%) had symptoms of ARFID. Of reported diets, dairy-free was the most frequent (45%), followed by gluten-free (36%). Where documented, exclusion diets were self-initiated by patients/parents in 66% of cases, and recommended by gastroenterology providers in 30%. Exclusion diet history was significantly associated with the presence of ARFID symptoms (OR = 3.12[95% CI 1.92-5.14], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

History of following an exclusion diet was common and was most often patient-initiated among pediatric and adult neurogastroenterology patients. As patients with self-reported exclusion diet history were over three times as likely to have ARFID symptoms, providers should be cognizant of this potential association when considering dietary interventions.

Identification and Management of Eating Disorders (including ARFID) in GI Patients

Eating disorders are characterized by cognitions (eg, fear of gastrointestinal symptoms around eating, overvaluation of body shape/weight) and behaviors (eg, dietary restriction, binge eating) associated with medical (eg, weight loss), and/or psychosocial impairments (eg, high distress around eating). With growing evidence for bidirectional relationships between eating disorders and gastrointestinal disorders, gastroenterology providers' awareness of historical, concurrent, and potential risk for eating disorders is imperative. In this conceptual review, we highlight risk and maintenance pathways in the eating disorder-gastrointestinal disorder intersection, delineate different types of eating disorders, and provide recommendations for the gastroenterology provider in assessing and preventing eating disorder symptoms..

Special Considerations for the Management of Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction in Older Adults

Purpose of Review

The world's population is aging rapidly, with 40% of patients seen in US gastroenterology (GI) clinics being 60 years or older. Many gastrointestinal problems are more common or unique to the older adult because of progressive damage to the structure and function of the GI tract. Until recently, the epidemiology of disorders of gut-brain interaction (such as irritable bowel syndrome and functional dyspepsia) was not well-characterized.

Recent Findings

Forty percent of persons worldwide have disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI), with varying global patterns of incidence in older adults. There are multiple first-line approaches to managing DGBI which can also be combined including pharmacologic (e.g., neuromodulators) and nonpharmacologic approaches including dietary therapies and brain-gut behavioral therapies. However, there are considerations clinicians must account for when offering each approach related to unique biopsychosocial factors in the older adult population. In this review, we aim to critically review recent literature on the pathophysiology, epidemiology, and special considerations for diagnosing and managing DGBI in the older adult population.

Summary

There have been many advances in the management of DGBI over the past decades. Given the increase in the number of older adults in the USA and worldwide, there is an urgent need for evidence-based guidance to help providers guide comprehensive care for specifically our aging patient population with respect to DGBI.