Satisfaction With Life in IBS Is Associated With Psychological Burden Rather than Gastrointestinal Symptom Severity.

INTRODUCTION: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) has a major impact on emotional, social, and professional life. This study aimed to evaluate general life satisfaction, a subjective measure of well-being, in IBS patients, and to determine which factors are associated with higher life satisfaction. METHODS: IBS patients (n = 195, mean age 51.4 ± 16.5 years, 73.8% female) recruited from primary and secondary/tertiary care completed questionnaires regarding gastrointestinal symptoms, quality of life, psychological factors, and life satisfaction (Satisfaction With Life Scale, 5 items, range 5-35). A finite mixture model analysis was performed to identify latent classes. Multivariable linear regression was used to identify variables associated with life satisfaction. RESULTS: Overall, 71.3% of the patients were satisfied about their life (Satisfaction With Life Scale-score ≥21). Three latent subgroups could be identified with significantly higher life satisfaction in the subgroup with higher mental quality of life, fewer anxiety and depressive symptoms, lower gastrointestinal specific anxiety, and lower gastrointestinal symptom severity, compared with the other 2 groups. Multivariable linear regression showed that higher physical quality of life (B0.168, P < 0.001) and higher mental quality of life (B0.199, P < 0.001) were associated with higher life satisfaction. Using multivariable regression, no significant association was found between gastrointestinal symptom severity and life satisfaction. DISCUSSION: Higher physical and mental quality of life, but not gastrointestinal symptom severity, were independently associated with higher general life satisfaction in IBS. These findings reinforce the clinical need in IBS treatment to focus on the full extent of the disorder and not merely on gastrointestinal symptom improvement. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00775060.

The Socioeconomic Impact of Irritable Bowel Syndrome: An Analysis of Direct and Indirect Health Care Costs.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is associated with substantial costs to society. Extensive data on direct costs (health care consumption) and indirect costs (health-related productivity loss) are lacking. Hence, we examined the socioeconomic costs of IBS and assessed which patient characteristics are associated with higher costs. METHODS: Cross-sectional data from 3 Rome-defined Dutch IBS patient cohorts (n = 419) were collected. Bootstrapped mean direct and indirect costs were evaluated per patient with IBS using validated questionnaires (ie, medical cost questionnaire and productivity cost questionnaire, respectively). Multivariable regression analyses were performed to identify variables associated with higher costs. RESULTS: Quarterly mean total costs per patient were €2.156 (95% confidence interval (CI), €1793-€2541 [$2444]), consisting of €802 (95% CI, €625-€1010 [$909]) direct costs and €1.354 (95% CI, €1072-€1670 [$1535]) indirect costs. Direct costs consisted primarily of health care professional consultations, with costs related to gastrointestinal clinic visits accounting for 6% and costs related to mental health care visits for 20%. Higher direct costs were significantly associated with older age (P = .007), unemployment (P = .001), IBS subtypes other than constipation (P = .033), lower disease-specific quality of life (P = .027), and more severe depressive symptoms (P = .001). Indirect costs consisted of absenteeism (45%), presenteeism (42%), and productivity loss related to unpaid labor (13%) and were significantly associated with the male sex (P = .014) and more severe depressive symptoms (P = .047). CONCLUSIONS: Productivity loss is the main contributor to the socioeconomic burden of IBS. Direct costs were not predominantly related to gastrointestinal care, but rather to mental health care. Awareness of the nature of costs and contributing patient factors should lead to significant socioeconomic benefits for society.

The estimation of a preference-based single index for the IBS-QoL by mapping to the EQ-5D-5L in patients with irritable bowel syndrome.

PURPOSE: The Irritable Bowel Syndrome Quality of Life (IBS-QoL) questionnaire is a commonly used and validated IBS-specific QoL instrument. However, this questionnaire is in contrast to the EQ-5D-5L, not preference-based and as such does not allow calculation of QALYs. The objective of this study was to describe the convergent- and known-group validity of both questionnaires and to develop a mapping algorithm from EQ-5D-5L which enable IBS-QoL scores to be transformed into utility scores for use in economic evaluations. METHODS: We used data from two multicenter randomized clinical trials, which represented the estimation and external validation dataset. The convergent validity was investigated by examining correlations between the EQ-5D-5L and IBS-QoL and the known-group validity by calculating effect sizes. Ordinary least squares (OLS), censored least absolute deviations (CLAD), and mixture models were used in this mapping approach. RESULTS: 283 IBS patients were included (n = 189 vs. n = 84). Mean IBS-QoL score was 71.13 (SD 15.66) and mean EQ-5D-5L utility score was 0.73 (SD 0.19). The overall sensitivity of the IBS-QoL and EQ-5D-5L to discriminate between patient and disease characteristics was similar. CLAD model 4, containing the total IBS-QoL score and squared IBS-SSS (IBS severity scoring system), was chosen as the most appropriate model to transform IBS-QoL scores into EQ-5D-5L utility scores. CONCLUSION: This study reports the development of an algorithm where the condition-specific questionnaire IBS-QoL can be used to calculate utility values for use in economic evaluations. Including a clinical measure, IBS-SSS, in the model improved the performance of the algorithm.

Digital Instruments for Reporting of Gastrointestinal Symptoms in Clinical Trials: Comparison of End-of-Day Diaries Versus the Experience Sampling Method.

BACKGROUND: Questionnaires are necessary tools for assessing symptoms of disorders of the brain-gut interaction in clinical trials. We previously reported on the excellent adherence to a smartphone app used as symptom diary in a randomized clinical trial on irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Other sampling methods, such as the experience sampling method (ESM), are better equipped to measure symptom variability over time and provide useful information regarding possible symptom triggers, and they are free of ecological and recall bias. The high frequency of measurements, however, could limit the feasibility of ESM in clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the adherence rates of a smartphone-based end-of-day diary and ESM for symptom assessment in IBS and functional dyspepsia (FD). METHODS: Data from 4 separate studies were included. Patients with IBS participated in a randomized controlled trial, which involved a smartphone end-of-day diary for a 2+8-week (pretreatment + treatment) period, and an observational study in which patients completed ESM assessments using a smartphone app for 1 week. Patients with FD participated in a randomized controlled trial, which involved a smartphone end-of-day diary for a 2+12-week (pretreatment + treatment) period, and an observational study in which patients completed ESM assessments using a smartphone app for 1 week. Adherence rates were compared between these 2 symptom sampling methods. RESULTS: In total, 25 patients with IBS and 15 patients with FD were included. Overall adherence rates for the end-of-day diaries were significantly higher than those for ESM (IBS: 92.7% vs 69.8%, FD: 90.1% vs 61.4%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates excellent adherence rates for smartphone app-based end-of-day diaries as used in 2 separate clinical trials. Overall adherence rates for ESM were significantly lower, rendering it more suitable for intermittent sampling periods rather than continuous sampling during longer clinical trials.

Patient preferences of healthcare delivery in irritable bowel syndrome: a focus group study.

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a highly prevalent disorder with significant negative impact on quality of life of patients that results in high healthcare use and costs. Improving healthcare outcomes for IBS patients is warranted, however the exact needs of IBS patients with regard to therapy and control of symptoms are unknown. METHODS: Focus group interviews, using a two-stage model, were performed with twenty-three IBS patients meeting Rome III criteria and one mother of a patient, from four different regions from the Netherlands. RESULTS: Twenty-four participants were included of whom majority were female (n = 21), mean age was 43 years, and mean duration of IBS was 18 years. Five categories of patients' perspectives were identified: clear communication, a multidisciplinary treatment team, centers of expertise, focus on scientific research and information about IBS that is widely available for patients. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these findings we highlight the need for IBS care givers to take these key items into account in IBS care. These elements aid clinicians, but mostly patients, in coping and management of symptoms and subsequent healthcare outcomes, reducing overall healthcare use and costs.

Examining the optimal cutoff values of HADS, PHQ-9 and GAD-7 as screening instruments for depression and anxiety in irritable bowel syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Self-rating scales are frequently used to screen for anxiety and depression in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Different cutoff values are recommended in literature, and guidelines have suggested the use of other screening instruments over time. The aim of this study was to assess the correlation between the most commonly used psychological screening instruments for anxiety and depression in IBS and to compare custom cutoff scores for these instruments. METHODS: Irritable bowel syndrome patients (n = 192) completed several questionnaires including the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS, HADS-A and HADS-D subscale), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7). Agreement at different cutoff points, for depressive and anxiety disorder, was assessed by use of the Gwet AC1 coefficient. KEY RESULTS: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)-D and PHQ-9 scores, and HADS-A and GAD-7 scores showed high correlations (rs  = 0.735 and rs  = 0.805, respectively). For depressive disorder, a Gwet AC1 value of 0.829 was found when recommended cutoff points from literature were compared (PHQ-9 cutoff ≥10, HADS-D cutoff ≥8). For anxiety disorder, a Gwet AC1 value of 0.806 was found when recommended cutoff points from literature were compared (GAD-7 cutoff ≥10, HADS-A cutoff ≥8). Even higher agreements were found when higher HADS cutoff values were chosen, with impact on sensitivity and specificity. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Custom cutoff values deem the HADS subscales (HADS-D and HADS-A) concordant to PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores. The choice of a cutoff value has substantial impact on sensitivity/specificity and is dependent on patient population, setting, and the purpose of use.

Efficacy and Safety of Peppermint Oil in a Randomized, Double-Blind Trial of Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Peppermint oil is frequently used to treat irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), despite a lack of evidence for efficacy from high-quality controlled trials. We studied the efficacy and safety of small-intestinal-release peppermint oil in patients with IBS and explored the effects of targeted ileocolonic-release peppermint oil. METHODS: We performed a double-blind trial of 190 patients with IBS (according to Rome IV criteria) at 4 hospitals in The Netherlands from August 2016 through March 2018; 189 patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis (mean age, 34.0 years; 77.8% female; 57.7% in primary care), and 178 completed the study. Patients were randomly assigned to groups given 182 mg small-intestinal-release peppermint oil, 182 mg ileocolonic-release peppermint oil, or placebo for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was abdominal pain response, as defined by the US Food and Drug Administration: at least a 30% decrease in the weekly average of worst daily abdominal pain compared with baseline in at least 4 weeks. The co-primary endpoint was overall relief of IBS symptoms, as defined by the European Medicines Agency. Secondary endpoints included abdominal pain, discomfort, symptom severity, and adverse events. RESULTS: Abdominal pain response did not differ significantly between the peppermint oil and placebo groups: 29 of 62 patients in the small-intestinal-release peppermint oil group had a response (46.8%, P = .170 vs placebo), 26 of 63 patients in the ileocolonic-release peppermint oil group had a response (41.3%, P = .385 vs placebo), and 22 of 64 patients in the placebo group had a response (34.4%). We did not find differences among the groups in overall relief (9.7%, P = .317 and 1.6%, P = .351 vs 4.7% for placebo). The small intestinal peppermint oil did, however, produce greater improvements than placebo in secondary outcomes of abdominal pain (P = .016), discomfort (P = .020), and IBS severity (P = .020). Adverse events, although mild, were more common in both peppermint oil groups (P < .005). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial of patients with IBS, we found that neither small-intestinal-release nor ileocolonic-release peppermint oil (8 weeks) produced statistically significant reductions in abdominal pain response or overall symptom relief, when using US Food and Drug Administration/European Medicines Agency recommended endpoints. The small-intestinal-release peppermint oil did, however, significantly reduce abdominal pain, discomfort, and IBS severity. These findings do not support further development of ileocolonic-release peppermint oil for treatment of IBS. Clinicaltrials.gov, Number: NCT02716285.