| Literature DB >> 25626450 |
Ewa Grodzinsky1, Susanna Walter2, Lisa Viktorsson3, Ann-Kristin Carlsson4, Michael P Jones5, Åshild Faresjö6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) is a chronic, relapsing gastrointestinal disorder, that affects approximately 10% of the general population and the majority are diagnosed in primary care. IBS has been reported to be associated with altered psychological and cognitive functioning such as mood disturbances, somatization, catastrophizing or altered visceral interoception by negative emotions and stress. The aim was to investigate the psychosocial constructs of self-esteem and sense of coherence among IBS patients compared to non-IBS patients in primary care.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25626450 PMCID: PMC4316793 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-015-0225-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Fam Pract ISSN: 1471-2296 Impact factor: 2.497
Figure 1Flow-chart of the study population.
Sociodemographic data for IBS-cases and controls
| Sociodemographic data: | IBS (n = 140) n % | Controls (n = 213) n % | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Male | 24 (17.1%) | 40 (18.9%) | 0.71 |
| Female | 116 (82.9%) | 172 (81.1%) | |
|
| 46.7 (SD = 13.9) | 51.4 (SD = 12.4) | 0.001 |
|
| |||
| White-collar city | 69 (49.3) | 118 (55.4) | 0.32 |
| Blue-collar cities | 71 (50.7) | 95 (44.6) | |
|
| |||
| Living alone | 44 (31.7) | 37 (17.5) | 0.002 |
| Married/cohabitant | 95 (68.3) | 174 (82.5) | |
|
| |||
| Low | 19 (13.6) | 15 (7.1) | 0.049 |
| Medium | 69 (49.3) | 95 (45.0) | |
| High | 52 (37.1) | 101 (47.9) |
Characteristics of social data for IBS-cases and controls
| Sociodemographic data: | IBS (n = 140) n % | Controls (n = 213) n % | p-value OR (CI 95%) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| (0.33) | ||
| Employed | 91 (65.0) | 156 (73.6) | 1.00 |
| Student | 16 (11.4) | 13 (6.1) | 2.11 (0.97-4.59) |
| Retired | 20 (14.3) | 30 (14.2) | 1.14 (0.61-2.13) |
| Sick leave | 5 (3.6) | 4 (1.9) | 2.14 (0.56-8.18) |
| Unemployed | 8 (5.7) | 9 (4.2) | 1.52 (0.57-4.09) |
|
| (0.45) | ||
| Great influence | 49 (49.0) | 94 (57.3) | 1.00 |
| Some influence | 42 (42.0) | 60 (36.6) | 1.83 (1.08-3.09) |
| No influence | 9 (9.0) | 10 (6.1) | 1.73 (0.66-4.53) |
|
| (0.12) | ||
| Important | 90 (91.8) | 158 (96.9) | 1.00 |
| Neither | 7 (7.1) | 3 (1.8) | 4.10 (1.03-16.23) |
| Unimportant | 1 (1.0) | 2 (1.2) | 1.14 (0.10-12.74) |
|
| (<0.001) | ||
| Good | 88 (62.9) | 198 (93.8) | 1.00 |
| Poor | 52 (37.1) | 13 (6.2) | 9.00 (4.66-17.37) |
|
| (<0.001) | ||
| Believes in the future | 93 (66.4) | 184 (86.8) | 1.00 |
| Doubt about the future | 47 (33.6) | 28 (13.2) | 3.32 (1.95-5.64) |
Comparisons of means between IBS patients (cases) and non-IBS patients (controls) for the psychosocial indicators of negative- and positive self-esteem and sense of coherence respectively
| Psychosocial indicators: | IBS cases n = 140 mean (SD) | Controls n = 213 mean (SD) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Negative self-esteem | 70.7 (52.8) | 44.4 (39.0) | <0.001 |
| Positive self-esteem | 172.6 (47.9) | 189.4 (43.7) | 0.001 |
| Sense of coherence | 60.6 (11.7) | 67.4 (9.6) | <0.001 |
Three separate multivariate analyses of the association between IBS cases and controls and negative, positive self-esteem and sense of coherence adjusted for other possible intervening factors
| Negative self-esteema)for cases and controls | Positive self-esteemb)for cases and controls | Sense of coherencec)for cases and controls | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standardized coefficient B | p-value | Standardized coefficient B | p-value | Standardized coefficient B | p-value | |
| Age (linear trend) | -.12 | 0.01 | .09 | 0.15 | .23 | <0.001 |
| Marital status (Married v Single) | .03 | 0.61 | .03 | 0.67 | -.04 | 0.43 |
| Education (linear trend) | -.09 | 0.17 | .08 | 0.18 | .11 | 0.03 |
| Health Status (Poor v Good) | .05 | 0.43 | -.08 | 0.21 | -.14 | 0.01 |
| Belief in the future (Doubts v Believes) | .37 | <0.001 | -.34 | <0.001 | -.43 | <0.001 |
| IBS case vs. controls | .13 | 0.02 | -.05 | 0.39 | -.10 | 0.04 |
a)Regression model adj R2 = .22, df = 6 F = 17.1 p < 0.001.
b)Regression model adj R2 = .15, df = 6 F = 11.1 p < 0.001.
c)Regression model adj R2 = .36, df = 6 F = 25.1 p < 0.001.