Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-014-0886-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Members of the LIRS Study Group are listed in Electronic Supplementary Material and should be regarded as collaborators for indexing purposes.
PAC-SYM is widely adopted to asses constipation severity. However, it has been validated in a small sample, few items have been included based on expert opinion and not on empirical grounds, and its factor structure has never been replicated. We aimed at evaluating the psychometric properties of PAC-SYM in patients with chronic constipation.
We enrolled 2,203 outpatients with chronic constipation in two waves. We used wave I sample to test the psychometric properties of the PAC-SYM and wave II sample to cross-validate its factor structure, to assess criterion validity, responsiveness to clinical change, and its minimal clinically important difference.
Only a minority of patients reported any rectal tearing (38 %). Deletion of such item leads to a 11-item version (M:PAC-SYM). The remaining items in the rectal domain were moderately correlated with the stool domain. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis revealed a bifactor structure with two subscales (stool and abdominal symptoms) and a general severity factor. The M:PAC-SYM demonstrated excellent reliability, moderate correlation with SF-12 and treatment satisfaction (r = 0.28–0.45), discrimination across Rome III criteria for functional constipation and abdominal pain, and responsiveness to clinical change (β = −0.49; ω 2 = 0.25). M:PAC-SYM minimal clinically important difference was 0.24.
Our analysis shows that the rectal domain may not represent a relevant cluster of symptoms for patients with chronic constipation. We developed a modified version of the PAC-SYM which might better represent symptom severity of most patients seeking care in gastroenterology referral centers.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Frank, L., Kleinman, L., Farup, C., Taylor, L., & Miner, P, Jr. (1999). Psychometric validation of a constipation symptom assessment questionnaire. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, 348, 70–77.
Tack, J., Stanghellini, V., Dubois, D., Joseph, A., Vandeplassche, L., & Kerstens, R. (2014). Effect of prucalopride on symptoms of chronic constipation. Neurogastroenterology and Motility, 1, 21–27. CrossRef
Quigley, E. M., Vandeplassche, L., Kerstens, R., & Ausma, J. (2009). Clinical trial: The efficacy, impact on quality of life, and safety and tolerability of prucalopride in severe chronic constipation—A 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 29, 315–328. PubMedCrossRef
Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Apolone, G., Mosconi, P., & Quattrocchi, L. (2005). Questionario sullo stato di salute SF-12, versione italiana. Milan: Guerini e Associati Editore. ISBN 8883352017.
Chen, F., West, S. G., & Sousa, K. H. (2006). A comparison of bifactor and second-order models of quality of life. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41(2), 189–225. CrossRef
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. CrossRef
Norman, G. R., Sloan, J. A., & Wyrwich, K. W. (2003). Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Medical Care, 41, 582–592. PubMed
Beaton, D. E. (2003). Simple as possible? Or too simple? Possible limits to the universality of the one-half standard deviation (comment). Medical Care, 41, 593–596. PubMed
Farivar, S. S., Kiu, H., & Hays, R. D. (2004). Another look at the half standard deviation estimate of the minimally important difference in health-related quality of life scores. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 4(5), 521–529. CrossRef
Cella, D., Eton, D. T., Lai, J., Peterman, A. H., & Merkel, D. E. (2002). Combining anchor and distribution-based methods to derive minimal clinically important differences on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) anemia and fatigue scales. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 24, 547–561. PubMedCrossRef
Maringwa, J. T., Quinten, C., King, M., Ringash, J., Osoba, D., Coens, C., et al. (2011). Minimal important differences for interpreting health-related quality of life scores from the EORTC QLQ-C30 in lung cancer patients participating in randomized controlled trials. Supportive Care in Cancer, 19(11), 1753–1760. PubMedCrossRef
Ashraf, W., Park, F., Lof, J., & Quigley, E. M. M. (1966). An examination of the reliability of reported stool frequency in the diagnosis of idiopathic constipation. American Journal of Gastroenterology, 91(1), 26–32.
- Confirmatory factor analysis of the Patient Assessment of Constipation-Symptoms (PAC-SYM) among patients with chronic constipation
Paul Maurice Conway
Laxative Inadequate Relief Survey (LIRS) Group
- Springer International Publishing