The Burdens, Concerns, and Quality of Life of Patients with Gastroparesis
- 708 Downloads
The impact of gastroparesis on patients from the patient’s viewpoint is needed to better address treatment priorities. The aims of this study were to: (1) Delineate burdens and concerns of patients with gastroparesis; (2) investigate specific symptoms contributing to impaired quality of life (QOL) in gastroparesis.
The International Foundation for Functional GI Disorders gastroparesis survey questionnaire was developed to describe patients’ viewpoint about their experience with gastroparesis and included Patient Assessment of Upper GI Symptoms (PAGI-SYM) and SF-36 QOL survey.
A total of 1423 adult patients with gastroparesis completed the survey. Average duration of gastroparesis symptoms was 9.3 years with time from onset to diagnosis 5.0 years. Patients felt that they receive good information regarding treatment options from physicians, the Internet, and Facebook. Patients rated their satisfaction with available treatment for their gastroparesis as dissatisfied (33%), somewhat dissatisfied (27%), neutral (14%), somewhat satisfied (15%), and satisfied (4%). Patients felt that gastroparesis symptoms that are most important to improve with treatment are nausea, stomach pain, and vomiting. Overall, there was a decreased quality of life by SF-36. Physical health QOL score was negatively correlated with symptoms including nausea (r = −0.37), upper abdominal pain (r = −0.37), and early satiety (r = −0.37).
This large series of patients with gastroparesis describes their burdens, concerns, and QOL. Nausea, vomiting, early satiety, and abdominal pain are important symptoms for treatment. Many patients are not satisfied with current treatments, wanting specific treatments for their disorder. Interestingly, a large number of patients find out about treatments, not only from their physician, but also using the Internet including social media.
KeywordsGastroparesis Diabetic gastroparesis Gastric emptying Quality of life
The study was funded through a Grant from IFFGD.
Daohai Yu, PhD, performed data analysis and writing and revised the manuscript. Frederick V. Ramsey, PhD, carried out data analysis and reviewed the manuscript. William Norton, Tegan Gaetano, and Nancy Norton developed the study aims and survey and reviewed the manuscript. Susan Schneck, MA, was involved in the development of study aims and survey. Henry P. Parkman, MD, helped in the development of study aims and survey, data analysis, and writing and revising of the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
- 8.Ware JE, Kosinski M, Dewey JE. How to score version 2 of the SF-36 ® health survey. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated; 2000.Google Scholar
- 11.Ware JE, Kosinski M. SF-36 ® physical and mental health summary scales: a manual for users of version 1. 2nd ed. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Inc; 2001.Google Scholar
- 13.Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Spritzer KL, Dixon WJ. A microcomputer program (sf36.exe) that generates SAS Code for scoring the SF-36 health survey. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual SAS Users Group International Conference; 1996:1128–1132.Google Scholar
- 14.Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B. SF-36 ® health survey manual and interpretation guide. Boston, MA: New England Medical Center, The Health Institute; 1993.Google Scholar
- 16.Hui R. Gastroparesis: Clinical Evaluation of Drugs for Treatment: Guidance for Industry. Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER); 2015.Google Scholar