Assesment of Psychiatric Symptoms and Co-morbidities in Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Aim: To determine the psychiatric symptom assesment of patients seeking treatment for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and to demonstrate the presence of more complicated psychiatric disorders. Subjects and Method: The participants were recruited from patients who were attending internal medicine and gastroenterology clinics and who fullfilled the Rome III criteria for IBS. Fifty patients with IBS (IBS group) and 50 patients with complaints other than gastrointestinal symptoms (control group) were randomly selected. All participants were screened by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID-I), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Symptom Check list – 90 (Revised) [SCL-90-R]. Results: Seventeen patients (34%) and three control subjects (6%) had at least one psychiatric diag-nosis (p = 0.001). Global severity index (GSI) total scores and SCL-90-R items were significantly higher in the IBS group than the control group (0.92 ± 0.46 vs 0.358 ± 0.19, p < 0.001). Beck anxiety inventory and BDI scores were higher in the IBS group than the control group (p < 0.001). Axis-I psychiatric disorders diagnosed with SCID-I were significantly higher in the IBS group (34% vs 6%) [p = 0.001]. Among the Axis-I disorders, somatoform and anxiety disorders were higher in the patient group than in the control subjects (p = 0.002 and p = 0.0057) whereas there was no difference for mood disorders (p = 0.204). Seven (14%) of the patients and two (4%) of the control subjects had at least one Axis-II psychiatric disorder diagnosed with SCID-II without any significance (p = 0.159). Conclusion: These findings suggest that except for mood and personality disorders, almost all psy-chiatric symptoms and disease co-morbities with IBS are higher than in the sample without IBS. We can easily use SCL-90-R, BAI and BDI in internal medicine and gastroenterology clinics to detect psychiatric symptom levels and then to refer patients to a psychiatrist for further evaluation and treatment. Keywords: Irritable bowel syndrome, psychiatric co-morbidities, psychiatric symptoms "Evaluación de los Síntomas Psiquiátricos y las Comorbilidades en Pacientes con el Síndrome del Intestino Irritable" RESUMEN Objetivo: Determinar la evaluación del síntoma psiquiátrico de pacientes que buscan tratamiento para el síndrome del intestino irritable (IBS), y demostrar la presencia de trastornos psiquiátricos más complicados. Sujetos y método: Los participantes reclutados fueron pacientes que asistían a clínicas de medicina interna y gastroenterología, y satisfacían los criterios de Roma III para el IBS Cincuenta pacientes con IBS (grupo IBS) y 50 pacientes aquejados de otras dolencias no gastrointestinales (grupo control) fueron seleccionados al azar. Todos los participantes pasaron por el tamiz de la Entrevista Clínica Estruc-turada para DSM-IV (SCID-I), el Inventario de Depresión de Beck (BDI), el Inventario de Ansiedad de Beck (BAI), y el Listado de Síntomas-90 (Revisado) [SCL-90-R]. Resultados: Diecisiete pacientes (34%) y tres sujetos de control (6%) tenían al menos un diagnóstico psiquiátrico (p = 0.001). Las puntuaciones totales del índice de severidad global (GSI) y los ítems del SCL-90-R fueron significativamente más altos en el grupo de IBS que en el grupo control (0.92 ± 0.46 frente a 0.358 ± 0.19, p < 0.001). Las puntuaciones del Inventario de Ansiedad de Beck y BDI fueron más altas en el grupo IBS que el grupo control (p < 0.001). Los trastornos psiquiátricos del eje I diagnosticados con SCID-I fueron significativamente más altos en el grupo IBS (34% vs. 6%) [p = 0.001]. Entre los desórdenes del Eje I, los trastornos somatoformos y los trastornos de ansiedad fueron más altos en el grupo de pacientes que en los sujetos del control (p = 0.002) y (p = 0.0057), en tanto que no hubo ninguna diferencia en cuanto a los trastornos de estados de ánimo (p = 0.204). Siete (14%) de los pacientes y dos (4%) de los sujetos del control tuvieron por lo menos un trastorno psiquiátrico del eje II diagnosticados con el SCID-II sin ninguna significación (p = 0.159). Conclusión: Estos hallazgos sugieren que salvo el caso de los trastornos de estados de ánimo y personalidad, casi todos los síntomas psiquiátricos y comorbilidades con el IBS son más altos que en la muestra sin IBS. Se puede usar con facilidad el SCL-90-R, el BAI y el BDI en las clínicas de medicina interna y gastroenterología para detectar los niveles de síntomas psiquiátricos, y remitir entonces a los pacientes a un psiquiatra para ulterior evaluación y tratamiento. Palabras claves: Síndrome del intestino irritable, psiquiátricos comorbilidades, síntomas psiquiátrico

Patterns of glucose self-monitoring among internal medicine outpatient patients with type 2 diabetes

Self-monitoring of blood glucose is vital for people with diabetes (PWD) to maintain acceptable glucose levels. The aim of this study is to demonstrate how effective home glucose monitoring was among PWD. Randomly selected 89 PWD who were admitted to internal medicine outpatient clinic of our teaching hospital in central Istanbul in a week and who had glucometers were included in the study. After informed consent was obtained, demographic features were recorded and a questionnaire was administered. The answers were categorized and the results were evaluated with SPSS statistical analysis method. Ethical committee approval was taken. The study was conducted according to Helsinki declaration. The patients were mostly female, income and education levels were generally low. Although the duration of diabetes of the patients was mostly more than 5 years, only half of them had a glucometer for more than 5 years. Most of them didn′t calibrate their devices. Most strikingly, only 25% of the patients in general were given a proper education for the usage of glucometers. Only 40% of the patients monitored their glucose levels regularly, rest of the patients used their glucometers rarely or none. Home monitoring of glucose levels for PWD would approve blood glucose levels by making necessary treatment adjustments available and help to prevent/delay diabetes related complications. Inclusion of the patients to the treatment and to monitoring of diabetes seems to be a reasonable starting point to achieve a better outcome of the disease

Parameters of Patients with Diabetes Mellitus (TEMD Obesity Study)

Background: Obesity is the main obstacle for metabolic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Turkey has the highest prevalence of obesity and type 2 diabetes in Europe. The effect of obesity on the metabolic control, and the macro-and microvascular complications of patients are not apparent. Objectives: This nationwide survey aimed to investigate the prevalence of overweight and obesity among patients with type 2 diabetes and to search for the impact of obesity on the metabolic control of these patients. We also investigated the independent associates of obesity in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: We consecutively enrolled patients who were under follow-up for at least 1 year in 69 tertiary healthcare units in 37 cities. The demographic, anthropometric, and clinical data including medications were recorded. Patients were excluded if they were pregnant, younger than 18 years, had decompensated liver disease, psychiatric disorders interfering with cognition or compliance, had bariatric surgery, or were undergoing renal replacement therapy. Results: Only 10% of patients with type 2 diabetes (n = 4,648) had normal body mass indexes (BMI), while the others were affected by overweight (31%) or obesity (59%). Women had a significantly higher prevalence of obesity (53.4 vs. 40%) and severe obesity (16.6 vs. 3.3%). Significant associations were present between high BMI levels and lower education levels, intake of insulin, antihypertensives and statins, poor metabolic control, or the presence of microvascular complications. Age, gender, level of education, smoking, and physical inactivity were the independent associates of obesity in patients with type 2 diabetes. Conclusion: The TEMD Obesity Study shows that obesity is a major determinant of the poor metabolic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. These results underline the importance of prevention and management of obesity to improve health care in patients with type 2 diabetes. Also, the results point out the independent sociodemographic and clinical associates of obesity, which should be the prior targets to overcome, in the national fight with obesity. (c) 2019 The Author(s) Published by S. Karger AG, BaselC1 [Sonmez, Alper; Haymana, Cem; Demirci, Ibrahim] Univ Hlth Sci, Gulhane Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, TR-06018 Ankara, Turkey.[Yumuk, Volkan] Istanbul Univ, Cerrahpasa Med Fac, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Istanbul, Turkey.[Barcin, Cem] Univ Hlth Sci, Gulhane Sch Med, Dept Cardiol, Ankara, Turkey.[Kiyici, Sinem] Univ Hlth Sci, Bursa Yuksek Ihtisas Training & Res Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Bursa, Turkey.[Guldiken, Sibel] Trakya Univ, Med Fac, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Edirne, Turkey.[Oruk, Gonca] Izmir Katip Celebi Univ, Ataturk Educ & Res Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Izmir, Turkey.[Saydam, Basak Ozgen] Dokuz Eylul Univ, Med Fac, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Izmir, Turkey.[Baldane, Suleyman] Selcuk Univ, Med Fac, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Konya, Turkey.[Kutluturk, Faruk] Gaziosmanpasa Univ, Med Fac, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Tokat, Turkey.[Kucukler, Ferit Kerim] Hitit Univ, Med Fac, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Corum, Turkey.[Deyneli, Oguzhan] Marmara Univ, Med Fac, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Istanbul, Turkey.[Cetinarslan, Berrin] Kocaeli Univ, Med Fac, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Kocaeli, Turkey.[Sabuncu, Tevfik] Harran Univ, Med Fac, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Urfa, Turkey.[Bayram, Fahri] Erciyes Univ, Med Fac, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Kayseri, Turkey.[Satman, Ilhan] Istanbul Univ, Med Fac, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Istanbul, Turkey.[Ayturk, Semra] Trakya Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Edirne, Turkey.[Yilmaz, Murat] Corlu REYAP Private Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Corlu, Turkey.[Asik, Mehmet] Canakkale 18 March Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Canakkale, Turkey.[Dinccag, Nevin; Cakmak, Ramazan; Turker, Fulya; Idiz, Cemile; Hacisahinogullari, Hulya; Bagdemir, Elif; Yildiz, Busra; Haliloglu, Ozlem] Istanbul Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Cerrahpasa, Turkey.[Sancak, Seda] Univ Hlth Sci, Sch Med, Fatih Sultan Mehmet Training & Res Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Istanbul, Turkey.[Ozsari, Levent; Cagiltay, Eylem] Univ Hlth Sci, Sch Med, Sultanabdulhamit Training & Res Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Istanbul, Turkey.[Imre, Eren] Marmara Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Istanbul, Turkey.[Sait Gonen; Boysan, S. Nur] Istanbul Sci Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Istanbul, Turkey.[Altuntas, Yuksel; Ozturk, Feyza Yener] Univ Hlth Sci, Sch Med, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training & Res Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Istanbul, Turkey.[Mert, Meral; Piskinpasa, Hamide] Univ Hlth Sci, Istanbul Bakirkoy Dr Sadi Konuk Training & Res Ho, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Istanbul, Turkey.[Aydin, Hasan] Yeditepe Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Istanbul, Turkey.[Ersoy, Canan; Oz Gul, Ozen] Uludag Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Bursa, Turkey.[Selek, Alev] Kocaeli Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Kocaeli, Turkey.[Dogru, Teoman; Kirik, Ali] Balikesir Univ, Sch Med, Dept Internal Med, Balikesir, Turkey.[Kebapci, Nur; Efe, Belgin] Eskisehir Osmangazi Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Odunpazari Eskisehir, Turkey.[Kaya, Ahmet; Cordan, Ilker] Necmettin Erbakan Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Konya, Turkey.[Kirac, Cem Onur] Selcuk Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Konya, Turkey.[Capa, Zehra] Univ Hlth Sci, Gulhane Sch Med, Ankara, Turkey.[Capa, Zehra] Gulhane Training & Res Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Cesur, Mustafa] Private Guven Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Yetkin, Ilhan] Gazi Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Corapcioglu, Demet; Canlar, Sule] Ankara Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Yildiz, Okan Bulent; Sendur, Suleyman Nahit] Hacettepe Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Cakir, Bekir; Ozdemir, Didem] Yildirim Beyazit Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Corakci, Ahmet] Ufuk Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Kutlu, Mustafa] Private Bayindir Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Bascil Tutuncu, Neslihan; Bozkus, Yusuf] Baskent Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Cakal, Erman] Univ Hlth Sci, Sch Med, Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Training & Res Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Demirbas, Berrin] TOBB Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Ertek, Sibel] Private Mem Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Altay, Mustafa; Dagdeviren, Murat] Univ Hlth Sci, Sch Med, Kecioren Training & Res Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Abedi, Amir Hassein] Erciyes Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Kayseri, Turkey.[Cetinkalp, Sevki; Ozisik, Hatice] Ege Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Izmir, Turkey.[Yener, Serkan] Dokuz Eylul Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Izmir, Turkey.[Guney, Engin; Unubol, Mustafa] Adnan Menderes Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Aydin, Turkey.[Yaylali, Guzin Fidan; Topsakal, Senay] Pamukkale Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Denizli, Turkey.[Hekimsoy, Zeliha] Celal Bayar Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Manisa, Turkey.[Akbaba, Gulhan] Mugla Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Mugla, Turkey.[Aslan, Ibrahim] Univ Hlth Sci, Antalya Training & Res Hosp, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Antalya, Turkey.[Balci, Mustafa Kemal; Dalkiran, Sefika] Akdeniz Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Antalya, Turkey.[Akbay, Esen] Mersin Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Mersin, Turkey.[Gul, Kamile] Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Kahramanmaras, Turkey.[Agbaht, Kemal] Private Defne Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Antalya, Turkey.[Yilmaz, Muge Ozsan] Mustafa Kemal Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Antakya, Turkey.[Bozkirli, Emre] Baskent Univ, Adana Training Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Ankara, Turkey.[Tetiker, B. Tamer; Cetinkaya Altuntas, Seher] Cukurova Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Adana, Turkey.[Atmaca, Aysegul; Durmus, Elif Tutku] 19 Mayis Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Samsun, Turkey.[Mete, Turkan] Univ Hlth Sci, Sch Med, Samsun Training & Res Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Samsun, Turkey.[Dikbas, Oguz] Giresun Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Giresun, Turkey.[Akin, Safak] Recep Tayyip Erdogan Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Rize, Turkey.[Nuhoglu, Irfan; Ersoz, Halil Onder] Karadeniz Tech Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Trabzon, Turkey.[Bayraktaroglu, Taner] Bulent Ecevit Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Zonguldak, Turkey.[Sisman, Pinar] Kars Harakani State Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Kars, Turkey.[Sahin, Ibrahim; Cetin, Sedat] Inonu Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Malatya, Turkey.[Capoglu, Ilyas; Akbas, Emin Murat] Erzincan Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Erzincan, Turkey.[Ucler, Rifki] Yuzuncu Yil Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Van, Turkey.[Eren, Mehmet Ali] Harran Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Sanliurfa, Turkey.[Tuzcu, Alpaslan Kemal; Pekkolay, Zafer] Dicle Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Diyarbakir, Turkey.[Ozkaya, Mesut] Univ Hlth Sci, Sch Med, Gaziantep Ersin Arslan Res & Training Hosp, Gaziantep, Turkey.[Araz, Mustafa] Gaziantep Univ, Sch Med, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Gaziantep, Turkey.[Salman, Serpil] Liv Hosp Ulus, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Istanbul, Turkey.[Dizdar, Oguzhan Sitki] Kayseri Educ & Res Hosp, Dept Internal Med, Kayseri, Turkey.[Gurkan, Eren] Mustafa Kemal Univ, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Antakya, Turkey.[Kargili Carlioglu, Ayse] Erzurum Reg Educ & Res Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Erzurum, Turkey

Turkish nationwide survEy of glycemic and other Metabolic parameters of patients with Diabetes mellitus (TEMD study)

AIMS: Turkey has the highest prevalence of diabetes in Europe. It is therefore essential to know the overall cardiovascular risk and reveal the predictors of metabolic control in Turkish adults with diabetes mellitus. METHODS: A nationwide, multicenter survey consecutively enrolled patients who were under follow up for at least a year. Optimal control was defined as HbA1c < 7%, home arterial blood pressure (ABP) < 135/85 mmHg, or LDL-C < 100 mg/dL. Achieving all parameters indicated triple metabolic control. RESULTS: HbA1c levels of patients (n = 5211) were 8.6 ± 1.9% (71 ± 22 mmol/mol) and 7.7 ± 1.7% (61 ± 19 mmol/mol), in Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, respectively. Glycemic control was achieved in 15.3% and 40.2%, and triple metabolic control was achieved in 5.5% and 10.1%, respectively. Only 1.5% of patients met all the criteria of being non-obese, non-smoker, exercising, and under triple metabolic control. Low education level was a significant predictor of poor glycemic control in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Few patients with Type 2, and even fewer with Type 1 diabetes have optimal metabolic control in Turkey. TEMD study will provide evidence-based information to policy makers to focus more on the quality and sustainability of diabetes care in order to reduce the national burden of the disease

Prevalence and predictors of gestational diabetes mellitus: a nationwide multicentre prospective study

Cetinkaya, Esra/0000-0003-2415-1236; Taskiran, Bengur/0000-0003-4842-450X; MELEKOGLU, RAUF/0000-0001-7113-6691; pekkolay, zafer/0000-0002-5323-2257; Ozer, Alev/0000-0002-0934-0226; kilinc, faruk/0000-0002-0198-2558; Aygun, Elif Ganime/0000-0003-3737-7250; KARAKILIC, ERSEN/0000-0003-3590-2656; Aydin, Hasan/0000-0003-4246-0681WOS: 000457530200011PubMed: 30402933Aim Prevalence rates of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) show considerable variation among different countries and regions of the world. The primary aim of this study was to determine the nationwide prevalence and predictors of GDM in Turkey. Methods We conducted prospective nationwide screening among pregnant women. Between August 2016 and November 2017, a total of 2643 pregnant women from 51 centres in 12 different regions were enrolled. A two-step screening method and Carpenter and Coustan criteria were used in the diagnosis of GDM. Clinical and biochemical data were obtained using electronic database software. Results The national prevalence of GDM was found to be 16.2% [95% confidence intervals (CI) 15.0% to 17.4%] without a significant difference between urban and rural regions. Women with GDM were older (mean age: 32 +/- 5 vs. 28 +/- 5 years, P < 0.001) and heavier (mean BMI: 27.2 +/- 5.1 vs. 24.7 +/- 4.7 kg/m(2), P < 0.001) than their counterparts without GDM. The prevalence of GDM tended to increase with age (< 25 years, 6.9%; 26-35 years, 15.6%; and 36-45 years, 32.7%; P < 0.001). Maternal age, maternal BMI, history of previous GDM and family history of diabetes mellitus were independent predictors of developing GDM (P < 0.05 for all). Low-risk women (age < 25 years, BMI < 25 kg/m(2), no family history of diabetes) comprised 10.7% of the total population and the prevalence of GDM in these women was 4.5% (95% CI 2.4% to 7.8%). Conclusion The results of this nationwide study indicate that GDM is very common, affecting one in seven pregnancies in Turkey. Implementation of international guidelines on screening and management of this public health problem is required