79 research outputs found

    Typhoid ulcer causing life-threatening bleeding from Dieulafoy's lesion of the ileum in a seven-year-old child: a case report

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>We describe a case of rare complication of typhoid fever in a seven-year-old child and review the literature with regard to other rare causes of bleeding per rectum. Dieulafoy's lesion is an uncommon but important cause of recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding. Dieulafoy's lesion located extragastrically is rare. We report a case of typhoid ulcer with Dieulafoy's lesion of the ileum causing severe life-threatening bleeding and discuss the management of this extremely uncommon entity.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>As a complication of typhoid fever, a seven-year-old Kurdish girl from Northern Iraq developed massive fresh bleeding per rectum. During colonoscopy and laparotomy, she was discovered to have multiple bleeding ulcers within the Dieulafoy's lesion in the terminal ileum and ileocecal region.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although there is no practical way of predicting the occurrence of such rare complications, we emphasize in this case report the wide array of pathologies that can result from typhoid fever.</p

    The EQ-5D (Euroqol) is a valid generic instrument for measuring quality of life in patients with dyspepsia

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is little information of the validity of generic instruments in measuring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with dyspepsia. We aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the EQ-5D, a brief and simple instrument, in measuring HRQOL in adult patients with dyspepsia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Consecutive adults with dyspepsia attending the Gastroenterology clinic in a tertiary referral center were interviewed with the EQ-5D (both English and Malay versions), the short-form Nepean Dyspepsia Index (SF-NDI), the SF-36 and Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire (LDQ). Known-groups and convergent construct validity were investigated by testing hypotheses at attribute and overall levels. A repeat telephone interview was conducted 2 weeks later to assess test-retest reliability.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 113 patients (mean (SD) age: 53.7 (14) years; 49.5% male; 24.8% Malays, 37.2% Chinese; 70.8% functional dyspepsia) were recruited. Response rate was 100% with nil missing data. Known-groups validation revealed 20/26 hypotheses fulfillment. Patients with more severe dyspepsia reported more problems with their usual activity (p = 0.07) and pain (p = 0.06) and demonstrated lower median VAS scores (60 vs 70, p = 0.002) and EQ-5D utility scores (0.72 vs 0.78, p = 0.002). Those reporting problems in various EQ-5D dimensions had significantly lower scores in relevant SF-36 and SF-NDI dimensions. The overall EQ-5D utility score also demonstrated good correlation with the SF-36 summary physical and mental scores and the SF-NDI total score. Intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest reliability was 0.66 (95% CI = 0.55 – 0.76).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The EQ-5D is an acceptable, valid and reliable generic instrument for measuring HRQOL in adult patients with dyspepsia.</p

    Evaluation of the Birmingham IBS symptom questionnaire

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) is a chronic/common condition that causes a significant effect on the individual (reduced quality of life), society (time lost off work) and health services. Comparison of studies evaluating the management of IBS has been hindered by the lack of a widely adopted validated symptom score. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a disease specific score to measure the symptoms of patients with IBS. Methods A self-administered 14-item symptom questionnaire (based on Rome II criteria) was mailed to 533 persons included in a prevalence study of IBS. The reliability of each underlying dimension identified was measured by Cronbach's α. Validity was assessed by comparing symptom scores with concurrent IBS specific quality of life (QoL) scores. Reproducibility was measured by the test-retest method and responsiveness measured by effect size. Results 379 (71%) questionnaires were returned. The underlying dimensions identified were pain, diarrhoea and constipation. Cronbach's α was 0.74 for pain, 0.90 for diarrhoea and 0.79 for constipation. Pain and diarrhoea dimensions had good external validity (r = -0.3 to -0.6), constipation dimension had moderate external validity (r = -0.2 to -0.3). All dimensions were reproducible (ICCs 0.75 to 0.81). Effect sizes of 0.27 to 0.53 were calculated for those with a reported improvement in symptoms. Conclusion The Birmingham IBS Symptom Questionnaire has been developed and tested. It has been shown to be suitable for self-completion and acceptable to patients. The questionnaire has 3 internal dimensions which have good reliability, external validity and are responsive to a change in health status.</p

    Which resources should be used to identify RCT/CCTs for systematic reviews: a systematic review

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Systematic reviewers seek to comprehensively search for relevant studies and summarize these to present the most valid estimate of intervention effectiveness. The more resources searched, the higher the yield, and thus time and costs required to conduct a systematic review. While there is an abundance of evidence to suggest how extensive a search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) should be, it is neither conclusive nor consistent. This systematic review was conducted in order to assess the value of different resources to identify trials for inclusion in systematic reviews. METHODS: Seven electronic databases, four journals and Cochrane Colloquia were searched. Key authors were contacted and references of relevant articles screened. Included studies compared two or more sources to find RCTs or controlled clinical trials (CCTs). A checklist was developed and applied to assess quality of reporting. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second. Medians and ranges for precision and recall were calculated; results were grouped by comparison. Meta-analysis was not performed due to large heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were conducted for: search strategy (Cochrane, Simple, Complex, Index), expertise of the searcher (Cochrane, librarian, non-librarian), and study design (RCT and CCT). RESULTS: Sixty-four studies representing 13 electronic databases met inclusion criteria. The most common comparisons were MEDLINE vs. handsearching (n = 23), MEDLINE vs. MEDLINE+handsearching (n = 13), and MEDLINE vs. reference standard (n = 13). Quality was low, particularly for the reporting of study selection methodology. Overall, recall and precision varied substantially by comparison and ranged from 0 to 100% and 0 to 99%, respectively. The trial registries performed the best with median recall of 89% (range 84, 95) and median precision of 96.5% (96, 97), although these results are based on a small number of studies. Inadequate or inappropriate indexing was the reason most cited for missing studies. Complex and Cochrane search strategies (SS) performed better than Simple SS. CONCLUSION: Multiple-source comprehensive searches are necessary to identify all RCTs for a systematic review, although indexing needs to be improved. Although trial registries demonstrated the highest recall and precision, the Cochrane SS or a Complex SS in consultation with a librarian are recommended. Continued efforts to develop CENTRAL should be supported
    corecore