M M Self1,2,3, A E Williams4, D I Czyzewski1,2,3, E M Weidler1,3,5, R J Shulman1,3,5. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. 2. Menninger Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. 3. Texas Children's Hospital, Clinical Care Center, Houston, TX, USA. 4. Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Riley Hospital for Children, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 5. Children's Nutrition Research Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In functional gastrointestinal disorders, patient recall of symptoms drives diagnostic decisions and evaluation of treatment response, and research conclusions about potential treatments. In pediatrics, parent report also impacts assessment and care. Hence, identifying methods for accurately capturing patient and parent report of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) symptoms is important. This study evaluated correspondence between retrospective questionnaire (parent and child report) and prospective diary data for children and adolescents with IBS. METHODS: Participants included 50 children/adolescents with IBS per Rome III criteria. Children completed a 2-week pain and stool diary. Children and parents subsequently completed a 2-week recall questionnaire, reporting number of pain days, maximum pain, days without bowel movement, and days with diarrhea during the diary interval. Intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots assessed agreement. KEY RESULTS: For pain and days without bowel movement, overall agreement between child recall questionnaire and child diary was strong, although under conditions likely to facilitate agreement and with individual variation observed. Parent recall and child diary were less concordant, and agreement about diarrhea was poor for parent and child. Age did not significantly correlate with agreement. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Child questionnaire with short recall interval may be a reasonable approximation for diary data, although this varies by individual and replication/investigation of lengthier recall are needed. Relying on parent questionnaire does not appear a suitable proxy, and recall of stool form by both parent and child appears more problematic. These results combined with existing literature support use of diary data whenever possible.
BACKGROUND: In functional gastrointestinal disorders, patientrecall of symptoms drives diagnostic decisions and evaluation of treatment response, and research conclusions about potential treatments. In pediatrics, parent report also impacts assessment and care. Hence, identifying methods for accurately capturing patient and parent report of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) symptoms is important. This study evaluated correspondence between retrospective questionnaire (parent and child report) and prospective diary data for children and adolescents with IBS. METHODS:Participants included 50 children/adolescents with IBS per Rome III criteria. Children completed a 2-week pain and stool diary. Children and parents subsequently completed a 2-week recall questionnaire, reporting number of pain days, maximum pain, days without bowel movement, and days with diarrhea during the diary interval. Intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots assessed agreement. KEY RESULTS: For pain and days without bowel movement, overall agreement between childrecall questionnaire and child diary was strong, although under conditions likely to facilitate agreement and with individual variation observed. Parent recall and child diary were less concordant, and agreement about diarrhea was poor for parent and child. Age did not significantly correlate with agreement. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Child questionnaire with short recall interval may be a reasonable approximation for diary data, although this varies by individual and replication/investigation of lengthier recall are needed. Relying on parent questionnaire does not appear a suitable proxy, and recall of stool form by both parent and child appears more problematic. These results combined with existing literature support use of diary data whenever possible.
Authors: D I Czyzewski; M M Lane; E M Weidler; A E Williams; P R Swank; R J Shulman Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2010-12-08 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Arthur A Stone; Joan E Broderick; Joseph E Schwartz; Saul Shiffman; Leighann Litcher-Kelly; Pamela Calvanese Journal: Pain Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Bruno P Chumpitazi; Erica M Weidler; Danita I Czyzewski; Mariella M Self; Margaret Heitkemper; Robert J Shulman Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2016-09-14 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Robert J Shulman; Mariella M Self; Danita I Czyzewski; Jerry Goldberg; Margaret Heitkemper Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2020-05-04 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Liz Febo-Rodriguez; Bruno P Chumpitazi; Salma Musaad; Andrew C Sher; Robert J Shulman Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2020-12-23 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Emily B Hollister; Numan Oezguen; Bruno P Chumpitazi; Ruth Ann Luna; Erica M Weidler; Michelle Rubio-Gonzales; Mahmoud Dahdouli; Julia L Cope; Toni-Ann Mistretta; Sabeen Raza; Ginger A Metcalf; Donna M Muzny; Richard A Gibbs; Joseph F Petrosino; Margaret Heitkemper; Tor C Savidge; Robert J Shulman; James Versalovic Journal: J Mol Diagn Date: 2019-04-17 Impact factor: 5.568
Authors: Pei-Lin Yang; Sarah W Matthews; Robert L Burr; Kevin C Cain; Pamela G Barney; Jasmine K Zia; Margaret H Heitkemper; Kendra J Kamp Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-04 Impact factor: 3.390