N A Koloski1,2,3, M Jones4, J Hammer1,2, M von Wulffen1,2, A Shah1,2, H Hoelz1, M Kutyla1, D Burger1, N Martin1, S R Gurusamy1, N J Talley3, G Holtmann5,6,7. 1. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia. 2. Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia. 3. Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, 2308, Australia. 4. Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, North Ryde, NSW, 2109, Australia. 5. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia. G.holtmann@uq.edu.au. 6. Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia. G.holtmann@uq.edu.au. 7. Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4067, Australia. G.holtmann@uq.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The clinical assessments of patients with gastrointestinal symptoms can be time-consuming, and the symptoms captured during the consultation may be influenced by a variety of patient and non-patient factors. To facilitate standardized symptom assessment in the routine clinical setting, we developed the Structured Assessment of Gastrointestinal Symptom (SAGIS) instrument to precisely characterize symptoms in a routine clinical setting. AIMS: We aimed to validate SAGIS including its reliability, construct and discriminant validity, and utility in the clinical setting. METHODS: Development of the SAGIS consisted of initial interviews with patients referred for the diagnostic work-up of digestive symptoms and relevant complaints identified. The final instrument consisted of 22 items as well as questions on extra intestinal symptoms and was given to 1120 consecutive patients attending a gastroenterology clinic randomly split into derivation (n = 596) and validation datasets (n = 551). Discriminant validity along with test-retest reliability was assessed. The time taken to perform a clinical assessment with and without the SAGIS was recorded along with doctor satisfaction with this tool. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis conducted on the derivation sample suggested five symptom constructs labeled as abdominal pain/discomfort (seven items), gastroesophageal reflux disease/regurgitation symptoms (four items), nausea/vomiting (three items), diarrhea/incontinence (five items), and difficult defecation and constipation (2 items). Confirmatory factor analysis conducted on the validation sample supported the initially developed five-factor measurement model ([Formula: see text], p < 0.0001, χ 2/df = 4.6, CFI = 0.90, TLI = 0.88, RMSEA = 0.08). All symptom groups demonstrated differentiation between disease groups. The SAGIS was shown to be reliable over time and resulted in a 38% reduction of the time required for clinical assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The SAGIS instrument has excellent psychometric properties and supports the clinical assessment of and symptom-based categorization of patients with a wide spectrum of gastrointestinal symptoms.
BACKGROUND: The clinical assessments of patients with gastrointestinal symptoms can be time-consuming, and the symptoms captured during the consultation may be influenced by a variety of patient and non-patient factors. To facilitate standardized symptom assessment in the routine clinical setting, we developed the Structured Assessment of Gastrointestinal Symptom (SAGIS) instrument to precisely characterize symptoms in a routine clinical setting. AIMS: We aimed to validate SAGIS including its reliability, construct and discriminant validity, and utility in the clinical setting. METHODS: Development of the SAGIS consisted of initial interviews with patients referred for the diagnostic work-up of digestive symptoms and relevant complaints identified. The final instrument consisted of 22 items as well as questions on extra intestinal symptoms and was given to 1120 consecutive patients attending a gastroenterology clinic randomly split into derivation (n = 596) and validation datasets (n = 551). Discriminant validity along with test-retest reliability was assessed. The time taken to perform a clinical assessment with and without the SAGIS was recorded along with doctor satisfaction with this tool. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis conducted on the derivation sample suggested five symptom constructs labeled as abdominal pain/discomfort (seven items), gastroesophageal reflux disease/regurgitation symptoms (four items), nausea/vomiting (three items), diarrhea/incontinence (five items), and difficult defecation and constipation (2 items). Confirmatory factor analysis conducted on the validation sample supported the initially developed five-factor measurement model ([Formula: see text], p < 0.0001, χ 2/df = 4.6, CFI = 0.90, TLI = 0.88, RMSEA = 0.08). All symptom groups demonstrated differentiation between disease groups. The SAGIS was shown to be reliable over time and resulted in a 38% reduction of the time required for clinical assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The SAGIS instrument has excellent psychometric properties and supports the clinical assessment of and symptom-based categorization of patients with a wide spectrum of gastrointestinal symptoms.
Authors: B M R Spiegel; R Bolus; N Agarwal; G Sayuk; L A Harris; S Lucak; E Esrailian; W D Chey; A Lembo; H Karsan; K Tillisch; J Talley; L Chang Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2010-09-28 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Javeria A Hashmi; Marwan N Baliki; Lejian Huang; Alex T Baria; Souraya Torbey; Kristina M Hermann; Thomas J Schnitzer; A Vania Apkarian Journal: Brain Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Phoebe Heenan; Rob H Creemers; Shriya Sharma; Jacqueline Keenan; Simone Bayer; Wayne Young; Janine Cooney; Kelly Armstrong; Karl Fraser; Paula M Skidmore; Nicholas J Talley; Nicole Roy; Richard B Gearry Journal: Inflamm Intest Dis Date: 2020-07-08
Authors: Patricia G Wolf; H Rex Gaskins; Jason M Ridlon; Sally Freels; Alyshia Hamm; Sarah Goldberg; Phyllis Petrilli; Teresa Schering; Sevasti Vergis; Sandra Gomez-Perez; Cemal Yazici; Carol Braunschweig; Ece Mutlu; Lisa Tussing-Humphreys Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Commun Date: 2020-07-08
Authors: Gerald Holtmann; Eamonn M Quigley; Ayesha Shah; Michael Camilleri; Victoria Py Tan; Kok Ann Gwee; Kentaro Sugano; Jose D Sollano; Kwong M Fock; Uday C Ghoshal; Minhu Chen; Axel Dignass; Henry Cohen Journal: J Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 4.369