Long-Term Study of Children With ROME III Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders Managed Symptomatically in a Biopsychosocial Model
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Our study evaluated progression of and identified potential factors contributing to outcomes of ROME III defined-functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) in children treated symptomatically in a biopsychosocial model of care with a long-term follow-up. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of pediatric patients who were diagnosed with ROME III defined-FGIDs including functional abdominal pain, functional dyspepsia, irritable bowel syndrome and abdominal migraine. Patients were managed symptomatically in a biopsychosocial model of care from the time of initial diagnosis. Demographics, management, progression and response to treatment assessed as complete, partial, and no improvement were reviewed. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-eight patients were included with mean age of 10.6 years, female 55.4%, mean number of encounters 3.3 visits, and mean follow-up was 18.7 months (range 2 - 59, SD 15.8). Diagnoses were functional abdominal pain 45%, irritable bowel syndrome 20.9%, multiple 13.2%, functional dyspepsia 12.8%, and abdominal migraine 8.1%. Investigations were performed in most patients: laboratory studies in 93.4% (non-contributory abnormal 23.6%), imaging studies in 45.3% (non-contributory abnormal 5%) and endoscopies in 43.0% (non-contributory abnormal 1.2%). Treatment included medication in 93.7%, and surgery in 1.9% (normal pathology). There were new functional gastrointestinal diagnosis in 11.6%, evolution of FGIDs, from one to another in 12.0%, and recurrence found in 35.7% of patients. There were 60.1% patients in the complete improvement group (CIG) and 39.1% in the partial/no improvement group (PIG/NIG). No statistical difference was found between CIG and PIG/NIG regarding demographics or evaluation. PIG/NIG had more encounters (mean 3.63 vs. 3.11; P = 0.03), had non-contributory lab abnormalities (34.4% vs. 20.0%; P = 0.01), needed more endoscopies (52.4% vs. 36.8%; P = 0.02), required more treatment changes (mean 1.41 vs. 0.81; P < 0.01) and developed new functional gastrointestinal diagnoses (19.4% vs. 6.5%; P < 0.01) with long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ROME III defined-FGIDs who experience partial or no improvement with treatment develop new FGID diagnosis, need more number of follow-up visits, require more number of endoscopies, need more treatment changes, and have more non-contributory laboratory abnormalities, compared to those who experience complete improvement. Symptomatic treatment offered in a biopsychosocial model of care is possibly beneficial in managing children with FGIDs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».