BACKGROUND: The primary diagnosis of functional dyspepsia (FD) is made on the basis of typical symptoms and by excluding organic gastrointestinal diseases that cause dyspeptic symptoms. However, there is difficulty reaching a diagnosisin FD. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficiency of the Usefulness Index (UI) test and history-taking in diagnosing FD. METHODS: A study on acute abdominal pain conducted by the World Organization of Gastroenterology Research Committee (OMGE) included 1333 patients presenting with acute abdominal pain. The clinical history-taking variables (n = 23) for each patient were recorded in detail using a preedefined structured data collection sheet, and the collected data were compared with the final diagnoses. RESULTS: The most significant clinical history-taking variables of FD in univariate analysis were risk ratio (RR): location of pain at diagnosis (RR = 5.7), location of initial pain (RR = 6.5), previous similar pain (RR = 4.0), duration of pain (RR = 2.9), previous abdominal surgery (RR = 4.1), previous abdominal diseases (RR = 4.0), and previous indigestion (RR = 3.1). The sensitivity of the physicians' initial decision in detecting FD was 0.44, specificity 0.99 and efficiency 0.98; UI was 0.19 and RR 195.3. In the stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis, the independent predictors of FD were the physicians' initial decision (RR = 266.4), location of initial pain (RR = 3.4),duration of pain (RR = 3.1), previous abdominal surgery (RR = 3.7), previous indigestion (RR = 2.2) and vomiting (RR = 2.0). CONCLUSIONS: The patients with upper abdominal paininitially and a previous history of abdominal surgery and indigestion tended to be at risk for FD. In these patients the UI test could help the clinician differentiate FD from other diagnoses of acute abdominal pain.
BACKGROUND: The primary diagnosis of functional dyspepsia (FD) is made on the basis of typical symptoms and by excluding organic gastrointestinal diseases that cause dyspeptic symptoms. However, there is difficulty reaching a diagnosisin FD. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficiency of the Usefulness Index (UI) test and history-taking in diagnosing FD. METHODS: A study on acute abdominal pain conducted by the World Organization of Gastroenterology Research Committee (OMGE) included 1333 patients presenting with acute abdominal pain. The clinical history-taking variables (n = 23) for each patient were recorded in detail using a preedefined structured data collection sheet, and the collected data were compared with the final diagnoses. RESULTS: The most significant clinical history-taking variables of FD in univariate analysis were risk ratio (RR): location of pain at diagnosis (RR = 5.7), location of initial pain (RR = 6.5), previous similar pain (RR = 4.0), duration of pain (RR = 2.9), previous abdominal surgery (RR = 4.1), previous abdominal diseases (RR = 4.0), and previous indigestion (RR = 3.1). The sensitivity of the physicians' initial decision in detecting FD was 0.44, specificity 0.99 and efficiency 0.98; UI was 0.19 and RR 195.3. In the stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis, the independent predictors of FD were the physicians' initial decision (RR = 266.4), location of initial pain (RR = 3.4),duration of pain (RR = 3.1), previous abdominal surgery (RR = 3.7), previous indigestion (RR = 2.2) and vomiting (RR = 2.0). CONCLUSIONS: The patients with upper abdominal paininitially and a previous history of abdominal surgery and indigestion tended to be at risk for FD. In these patients the UI test could help the clinician differentiate FD from other diagnoses of acute abdominal pain.