Digestive Diseases and Sciences

, Volume 38, Issue 9, pp 1569–1580

U. S. Householder survey of functional gastrointestinal disorders

Prevalence, sociodemography, and health impact
  • Douglas A. Drossman
  • Zhiming Li
  • Eileen Andruzzi
  • Robert D. Temple
  • Nicholas J. Talley
  • W. Grant Thompson
  • William E. Whitehead
  • Josef Janssens
  • Peter Funch-Jensen
  • Enrico Corazziari
  • Joel E. Richter
  • Gary G. Koch
Original Articles

Abstract

Our objective was to obtain national data of the estimated prevalence, sociodemographic relationships, and health impact of persons with functional gastrointestinal disorders. We surveyed a stratified probability random sample of U.S householders selected from a data base of a national market firm (National Family Opinion, Inc.). Questions were asked about bowel symptoms, sociodemographic associations, work absenteeism, and physician visits. The sampling frame was constructed to be demographically similar to the U.S. householder population based on geographic region, age of householder, population density, household income and household size. Of 8250 mailings, 5430 were returned suitable for analysis (66% response). The survey assessed the prevalence of 20 functional gastrointestinal syndromes based on fulfillment of multinational diagnostic (Rome) criteria. Additional variables studied included: demographic status, work absenteeism, health care use, employment status, family income, geographic area of residence, population density, and number of persons in household. For this sample, 69% reported having at least one of 20 functional gastrointestinal syndromes in the previous three months. The symptoms were attributed to four major anatomic regions: esophageal (42%), gastroduodenal (26%), bowel (44%), and anorectal (26%), with considerable overlap. Females reported greater frequencies of globus, functional dysphagia, irritable bowel syndrome, functional constipation, functional abdominal pain, functional biliary pain and dyschezia; males reported greater frequencies of aerophagia and functional bloating. Symptom reporting, except for incontinence, declines with age, and low income is associated with greater symptom reporting. The rate of work/school absenteeism and physician visits is increased for those having a functional gastrointestinal disorder. Furthermore, the greatest rates are associated with those having gross fecal incontinence and certain more painful functional gastrointestinal disorders such as chronic abdominal pain, biliary pain, functional dyspepsia and IBS. Preliminary information on the prevalence, socio-demographic features and health impact is provided for persons who fulfill diagnostic criteria for functional gastrointestinal disorders.

Key Words

functional bowel disorders epidemiology diagnosis demography health care use work absenteeism 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Drossman DA, Funch-Jensen P, Janssens J, Talley NJ, Thompson WG, Whitehead WE: Identification of subgroups of functional bowel disorders. Gastroenterol Int 3:159–172, 1990Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Thompson WG, Heaton KW: Functional bowel disorders in apparently health people. Gastroenterology 79:283–288, 1980Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Drossman DA, Sandler RS, McKee DC, Lovitz AJ: Bowel patterns among subjects not seeking health care. Use of a questionnaire to identify a population with bowel dysfunction. Gastroenterology 83:529–534, 1982Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thompson WG, Heaton KW: Heartburn and globus in apparently healthy people. Can Med Assoc J 126:46–48, 1982Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Talley NJ, Zinsmeister AR, Van Dyke C, Melton III LJ: Epidemiology of colonic symptoms and the irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology 101:927–934, 1991Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Richter JE, Baldo F, Clouse RE, Diamant NE, Janssens J, Staiano A: Working team report on functional esophageal disorders. Gastroenterol Int 5:3–7, 1992Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Whitehead WE, Devroede G, Habib FI, Meunier P, Wald A: Functional disorders of the anorectum. Gastroenterol Int 5:92–108, 1992Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sandler RS: Epidemiology of irritable bowel syndrome in the United States. Gastroenterology 99:409–415, 1990Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mitchell CM, Drossman DA: Survey of the AGA membership relating to patients with functional gastrointestinal disorders. Gastroenterology 92:1282–1284, 1987Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bureau of Census: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1991. Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Commerce, 1991, pp 46–48Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thompson WG, Creed F, Drossman DA, Heaton KW, Mazzacca G: Functional bowel disorders and chronic functional abdominal pain. Gastroenterol Int 5:75–91, 1992Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Talley NJ, Colin-Jones D, Koch KL, Koch M, Nyren O, Stanghellini V: Functional dyspepsia: A classification with guidelines for diagnosis and management. Gastroenterol Int 4:145–160, 1991Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Corazziari E, Funch-Jensen P, Hogan W, Tanaka J, Toouli J: Working team report on functional biliary disorders. Gastroenterol Int 1993 (in press)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Milholland AV, Wheeler SG, Heieck JJ: Medical assessment by a Delphi group opinion technic. N Engl J Med 298:1272–1275, 1973Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Drossman DA, Thompson WG, Talley NJ, Funch-Jensen P, Janssens J, Whitehead WE: Response to guest editorial. Gastroenterol Int 4:44–45, 1991Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Elston JM, Koch GG, Weissert WG: Regression-adjusted small area estimates of functional dependency in the noninstitutional aged. Am J Public Health 81:335–343, 1991Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    LeClere FB, Moss AJ, Everhart JE, Roth HP: Prevalence of major digestive disorders and bowel symptoms, 1989. Advance data from vital and health statistics: No. 212. Hyatsville, Maryland, National Center for Health Statistics, 1992Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Drossman DA, Sandler RS, Broom CM, McKee DC: Urgency and fecal soiling in people with bowel dysfunction. Dig Dis Sci 31:1221–1225, 1986Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Whitehead WE, Winget C, Fedoravicius AS, Wooley S, Blackwell B: Learned illness behavior in patients with irritable bowel syndrome and peptic ulcer. Dig Dis Sci 27:202–208, 1982Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Barsky AJ: The paradox of health. N Engl J Med 318:414–418, 1988Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Drossman DA: Psychosocial considerations in gastroenterology.In Gastrointestinal Disease: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, Management MH Sleisenger, JS Fordtran, JP Cello, M Feldman (eds). Philadelphia WB Saunders, 1993, pp 3–17Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sandler RS, Drossman DA, Nathan HP, McKee DC: Symptom complaints and health care seeking behavior in subjects with bowel dysfunction. Gastroenterology 87:314–318, 1984Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Manning AP, Wyman JB, Heaton KW: How trustworthy are bowel histories? Comparison of recalled and recorded information. Br Med J 2:213–214, 1976Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Heaton KW, Ghosh S, Braddon FEM: How bad are the symptoms and bowel dysfunction of patients with the irritable bowel syndrome? a prospective, controlled study with emphasis on stool form. Gut 32:73–79, 1991Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Christensen J: Heraclides or the physician. Gastroenterol Int 3:45–48, 1990Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Revised. Washington, D.C., American Psychiatric Association, 1987, 567 ppGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schumaker HRJ: Primer on the Rheumatic Diseases. Atlanta, Arthritis Foundation, 1988, 355 ppGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Koch GG, Beck JD: Statistical methodologies useful for the analysis of data from risk-assessment studies. J Public Health Dent 52:165–186, 1992Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Koch GG, Freeman DHJ, Freeman JL: Strategies in the multivariate analysis of data from complex surveys. Int Stat Rev 43:59–78, 1975Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Koch GG, Gillings DB, Stokes ME: Biostatistical implications of design, sampling and measurement to the analysis of health science data. Annu Rev Public Health 1:163–225, 1980Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Koch GG, Gillings DB: Inference, design based vs model based.In Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences, Vol. 4. NL Johnson, S Kotz (ed). New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1983, pp 84–88Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Douglas A. Drossman
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • Zhiming Li
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • Eileen Andruzzi
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • Robert D. Temple
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • Nicholas J. Talley
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • W. Grant Thompson
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • William E. Whitehead
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • Josef Janssens
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • Peter Funch-Jensen
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • Enrico Corazziari
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • Joel E. Richter
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • Gary G. Koch
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  1. 1.Division of Digestive DiseasesUniversity of North CarolinaChapel Hill
  2. 2.The Procter & Gamble Co.Cincinnati
  3. 3.Mayo ClinicRochester
  4. 4.Ottawa Civic HospitalOttawaCanada
  5. 5.Johns Hopkins UniversityBaltimore
  6. 6.University of LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  7. 7.Hvidovre HospitalHvidovreDenmark
  8. 8.Universita “La Sapienza”RomeItaly
  9. 9.University of AlabamaBirmingham

Personalised recommendations