BACKGROUND/AIMS: Despite a high frequency of pouch function disorders, most patients are satisfied with the outcome of ileo-anal pouch surgery. Aims of this study were: 1) To assess the influence of pouch function on quality of life and, 2) to determine which aspects of pouch dysfunction affect quality of life the most. METHODOLOGY: Questionnaires, addressing current pouch function and quality of life (Rand-36, GIQLI), were sent to all (53) patients with intact ileo-anal pouches, operated on between 1987 and 1997 in our center. RESULTS: Thirty-six of 53 patients responded. Compared to reference data, Rand-36 scores for role-limitations based on a physical problem, vitality and general health perception were significantly diminished (P < 0.01). Physical and social functioning were normal. The GIQLI score was slightly decreased (111.7 vs. 125.8, P < 0.01). Overall pouch function did not correlate with the overall Rand-36 score, but correlated well with the overall GIQLI score (r = -0.47). Both quality of life scores were diminished mainly by the night-time stool frequency. CONCLUSIONS: 1) Quality of life after IPAA, as measured with validated questionnaires, is only slightly decreased; 2) the GIQLI questionnaire is more sensitive to pouch dysfunction than the Rand-36; 3) night-time stool frequency influences quality of life the most.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Despite a high frequency of pouch function disorders, most patients are satisfied with the outcome of ileo-anal pouch surgery. Aims of this study were: 1) To assess the influence of pouch function on quality of life and, 2) to determine which aspects of pouch dysfunction affect quality of life the most. METHODOLOGY: Questionnaires, addressing current pouch function and quality of life (Rand-36, GIQLI), were sent to all (53) patients with intact ileo-anal pouches, operated on between 1987 and 1997 in our center. RESULTS: Thirty-six of 53 patients responded. Compared to reference data, Rand-36 scores for role-limitations based on a physical problem, vitality and general health perception were significantly diminished (P < 0.01). Physical and social functioning were normal. The GIQLI score was slightly decreased (111.7 vs. 125.8, P < 0.01). Overall pouch function did not correlate with the overall Rand-36 score, but correlated well with the overall GIQLI score (r = -0.47). Both quality of life scores were diminished mainly by the night-time stool frequency. CONCLUSIONS: 1) Quality of life after IPAA, as measured with validated questionnaires, is only slightly decreased; 2) the GIQLI questionnaire is more sensitive to pouch dysfunction than the Rand-36; 3) night-time stool frequency influences quality of life the most.
Authors: Amy L Halverson; Tracy L Hull; Feza Remzi; Jeffery P Hammel; Tom Schroeder; Victor W Fazio Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2002 May-Jun Impact factor: 3.452