Impact of irritable bowel syndrome on quality of life and resource use in the United States and United Kingdom
Impact of irritable bowel syndrome on quality of life and resource use in the United States and United Kingdom
复制标题
DOI：
10.1159/000007593
复制
发表时间：
1999-01-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Strassels, S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hahn, BA;Yan, SK;Strassels, S
背景：虽然肠易激综合征（IBS）不是一种危及生命的疾病，但它会对患者的日常活动和生活质量产生严重影响。这种对生活质量的影响以前没有在不同的文化中进行过比较。方法：我们采用横断面即时邮政调查，随机抽样500名美国国际功能性胃肠疾病基金会成员和500名英国IBS网络支持小组成员，比较了与健康相关的生活质量和卫生保健资源利用的措施。该分析仅限于报告医生告诉他们患有肠易激综合征的人。一般健康状况问卷SF-36和疾病特异性问卷肠易激综合征生活质量问卷（IBSQOL）作为调查的一部分进行自我管理，以衡量与健康相关的生活质量。SF-36的结果与美国和英国有和没有慢性疾病的成年人公布的规范数据进行了比较。结果：英国组（n = 343）报告的SF-36和IBSQOL的四个参数的生活质量明显低于美国组（n = 287）。两国肠易激综合征患者的总体健康状况都比各自国家的普通人群差得多。两国肠易激综合征患者的卫生保健资源利用（即急诊室、医生和医院门诊就诊）相似，肠易激综合征对就业的直接影响也相似。近三分之一的受访者在过去4周内因肠易激综合症至少缺勤1天，更大比例的人因肠易激综合症减少了工作或活动。总的来说，平均损失或减少的时间接近5天或1个工作周。结论：在美国和英国，肠易激综合征对生活质量和资源利用均有显著影响。然而，对生活质量的影响在英国似乎比在美国更大。
Background: Although irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is not a life-threatening condition, it can have a serious impact on a patient's daily activities and quality of life. This effect on quality of life has not been compared previously across different cultures. Methods: We compared measures of health-related quality of life and health care resource utilization using a cross-sectional point-in-time postal survey of a random sample of 500 members of the International Foundation for Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders in the US a nd 500 members of the IBS Network support group in the UK. The analysis was limited to persons who reported that a physician had told them they had IBS. A general health status questionnaire, the SF-36, and a disease-specific questionnaire, the Irritable Bowel Syndrome Quality of Life questionnaire (IBSQOL), were self-administered as part of the survey to measure health-related quality of life. Results on the SF-36 were compared with published normative data for adults in the US and UK with and without chronic diseases. Results: The UK group (n = 343) reported significantly poorer quality of life on the SF-36 and on four parameters of the IBSQOL than did the US group (n = 287). The general health status of persons with IBS in either country was much poorer compared with that of general populations in the respective countries. Health care resource utilization (i.e. emergency room, doctor and hospital outpatient visits) of persons with IBS was similar in the two countries, as was the direct effect of IBS on employment. Nearly one third of those surveyed missed at least 1 day of work due to IBS in the previous 4 weeks, and a greater percentage cut back in their work or activites due to IBS. Taken together, average time lost or cut back amounted to nearly 5 days or 1 work-week. Conclusion: IBS has ii significant impact on quality of life and resource use in both the US and UK. The effect on quality of life, however, appears to be greater in the UK than in the US.