Functional gastroduodenal disorders

While widely used in research, the 1991 Rome criteria for the gastroduodenal disorders, especially symptom subgroups in dyspepsia, remain contentious. After a comprehensive literature search, a consensus-based approach was applied, supplemented by input from international experts who reviewed the report. Three functional gastroduodenal disorders are defined. Functional dyspepsia is persistent or recurrent pain or discomfort centered in the upper abdomen; evidence of organic disease likely to explain the symptoms is absent, including at upper endoscopy. Discomfort refers to a subjective, negative feeling that may be characterized by or associated with a number of non-painful symptoms including upper abdominal fullness, early satiety, bloating, or nausea. A dyspepsia subgroup classification is proposed for research purposes, based on the predominant (most bothersome) symptom: (a) ulcer-like dyspepsia when pain (from mild to severe) is the predominant symptom, and (b) dysmotility-like dyspepsia when discomfort (not pain) is the predominant symptom. This classification is supported by recent evidence suggesting that predominant symptoms, but not symptom clusters, identify subgroups with distinct underlying pathophysiological disturbances and responses to treatment. Aerophagia is an unusual complaint characterized by air swallowing that is objectively observed and troublesome repetitive belching. Functional vomiting refers to frequent episodes of recurrent vomiting that is not self-induced nor medication induced, and occurs in the absence of eating disorders, major psychiatric diseases, abnormalities in the gut or central nervous system, or metabolic diseases that can explain the symptom. The current classification requires careful validation but the criteria should be of value in future research.


Keywords: dyspepsia; functional dyspepsia; aerophagia; psychogenic vomiting; Rome I

Discrepancies between upper GI symptoms described by those who have them and their identification by conventional medical terminology: a survey of sufferers in four countries

Objective: The objective of this study was to develop a self-administered questionnaire for upper gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms using lay vocabulary uninfluenced by established medical terminology or concepts and to conduct a survey of symptom occurrence among sufferers in four countries. Methods: The questionnaire was designed by integrating information gained from the vocabulary used by 38 upper GI symptom sufferers. There was no medical input to its development. The questionnaire was then used, after appropriate translation, in Brazil, Russia, the UK and the USA. Details of 10 659 symptom episodes were obtained from 2665 individuals. Results: Nine symptoms described in lay vocabulary were identified during questionnaire development. Of these, one corresponded to regurgitation, whereas two that were distinguished by survey participants might both be interpreted as heartburn. One chest symptom for which a corresponding medical term was uncertain occurred in ~30% of the respondents. Five different 'stomach' or abdominal symptoms were identified. The predominant symptom and the pattern of concurrent symptoms often varied from one symptom episode to another. Use of the terms 'heartburn', 'reflux', 'indigestion' and 'burning stomach' to describe symptoms varied between countries. Conclusion: Some common upper GI symptoms described by those who suffer them have no clear counterpart in conventional medical terminology. Inadequacy of the conventional terminology in this respect deserves attention, first, to characterize it fully, and thereafter to construct enquiry that delivers more precise symptom identification. Our results suggest that improvement may require the use of vocabulary of individuals suffering the symptoms without imposing conformity with established symptom concepts

Validation of a brief symptom questionnaire (ReQuest in Practice) for patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

Background  A clinical need exists for a means of assessing symptom control in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. The ReQuest questionnaire has been extensively validated for symptom assessment in both erosive and non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease but was designed for research purposes. We derived a shorter version (ReQuest in Practice) that would be more convenient for clinical practice. Aim  To validate ReQuest in Practice in patients suffering from gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Methods  Multicentre, non-interventional, crossover comparison. Patients completed ReQuest in Practice followed by ReQuest or vice versa. Before and after a planned endoscopy, patients completed the health-related quality of life questionnaire GERDyzer. Internal consistency and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient were calculated. Construct validity was evaluated by correlation with ReQuest and GERDyzer. Results  There was high internal consistency of ReQuest in Practice (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.9) and a high Intraclass Correlation Coefficient of 0.99. The measurement error of ReQuest in Practice was 4.1. High correlation between ReQuest in Practice and ReQuest (Spearman correlation coefficient: 0.9) and GERDyzer (Spearman correlation coefficient: 0.8) demonstrated construct validity. Conclusions  ReQuest in Practice was proven to be valid and reliable. Its close correlation with ReQuest makes it a promising tool to guide the clinical management of patients across the full spectrum of both erosive and non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease