Willingness to pay for medications among patients with Rome IV Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Treating disorders of brain-gut interaction with multidisciplinary integrated care. Moving towards a new standard of care

Disorders of brain-gut interaction (DGBI) are highly prevalent in our community with a negative burden on the quality of life and function. Symptoms are frequently food-induced, and psychological disorders are commonly co-morbid and contribute greatly to symptom severity and healthcare utilization, which can complicate management. Pathophysiological contributors to the development and maintenance of DGBI are best appreciated within the biopsychosocial model of illness. Established treatments include medical therapies targeting gastrointestinal physiology, luminal microbiota or visceral sensitivity, dietary treatments including dietary optimization and specific therapeutic diets such as a low-FODMAP diet, and psychological interventions. The traditional "medical model" of care, driven predominantly by doctors, poorly serves sufferers of DBGI, with research indicating that a multidisciplinary, integrated-care approach produces better outcomes. This narrative review explores the current evidence for multidisciplinary care and provides the best practice recommendations for physicians and healthcare systems managing such patients.

Utility of irritable bowel syndrome subtypes and most troublesome symptom in predicting disease impact and burden

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the characteristics of individuals with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) according to stool subtype or the most troublesome symptom reported by the individual, or whether these are useful in predicting the impact of IBS.

METHODS

We collected demographic, gastrointestinal, and psychological symptoms, healthcare usage and direct healthcare costs, impact on work and activities of daily living, and quality of life data from individuals with Rome IV-defined IBS.

KEY RESULTS

We recruited 752 people with Rome IV IBS. Individuals with IBS-D reported a poorer disease-specific quality of life than those with IBS-C or IBS-M (mean (SD) IBS-QOL 45.3 (23.0) for IBS-D, vs. 52.3 (19.9) for IBS-C, vs. 49.4 (22.0) for IBS-M, p = 0.005). Mean (SD) IBS-QOL scores were also lower amongst those who reported diarrhea (44.8 (22.3)) or urgency (44.6 (22.3)) as their most troublesome symptom, compared with those reporting abdominal pain (52.2 (22.9)), constipation (49.5 (21.8)), or abdominal bloating or distension (50.4 (21.3)). However, there were no differences in mean EQ-5D scores, IBS severity, levels of anxiety, depression, somatoform symptom-reporting, or gastrointestinal symptom-specific anxiety. Direct healthcare costs of IBS were similar across all subtypes and all most troublesome symptom groups, although some differences in work productivity and social leisure activities were detected.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

There appears to be limited variation in the characteristics of individuals with Rome IV IBS based on both stool subtypes and most troublesome symptom reported, suggesting that gastrointestinal symptoms alone have limited ability to predict disease impact and burden.

Antibiotics and Probiotics for Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a disorder of a gut-brain interaction characterised by abdominal pain and a change in stool form or frequency. Current symptom-based definitions and the classification of IBS promote heterogeneity amongst patients, meaning that there may be several different pathophysiological abnormalities leading to similar symptoms. Although our understanding of IBS is incomplete, there are several indicators that the microbiome may be involved in a subset of patients. Techniques including a faecal sample analysis, colonic biopsies, duodenal aspirates or surrogate markers, such as breath testing, have been used to examine the gut microbiota in individuals with IBS. Because of a lack of a clear definition of what constitutes a healthy gut microbiota, and the fact that alterations in gut microbiota have only been shown to be associated with IBS, a causal relationship is yet to be established. We discuss several hypotheses as to how dysbiosis may be responsible for IBS symptoms, as well as potential treatment strategies. We review the current evidence for the use of antibiotics and probiotics to alter the microbiome in an attempt to improve IBS symptoms. Rifaximin, a non-absorbable antibiotic, is the most studied antibiotic and has now been licensed for use in IBS with diarrhoea in the USA, but the drug remains unavailable in many countries for this indication. Current evidence also suggests that certain probiotics, including Lactobacillus plantarum DSM 9843 and Bifidobacterium bifidum MIMBb75, may be efficacious in some patients with IBS. Finally, we describe the future challenges facing us in our attempt to modulate the microbiome to treat IBS.

Factors associated with lower disease-specific and generic health-related quality of life in Rome IV irritable bowel syndrome

BACKGROUND

Little is known about associations with reduced quality of life in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) or impact of IBS on quality of life compared with other chronic conditions.

METHODS

We collected demographic, gastrointestinal and psychological symptoms, healthcare usage, direct healthcare costs, impact on work and activities of daily living data from 752 individuals with Rome IV-defined IBS. We used the irritable bowel syndrome quality of life (IBS-QOL) and the EQ-5D-5L questionnaires to examine characteristics associated with lower quality of life.

RESULTS

The mean IBS-QOL among all 752 individuals with Rome IV IBS was 48.4 (SD 22.3) and the mean EQ-5D score was 0.570 (SD 0.283), the latter being comparable to people with stroke, leg ulcers or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Lower levels of both disease-specific and generic quality of life were associated with severe IBS symptom scores, abnormal anxiety or depression scores, and higher somatoform symptom-reporting and gastrointestinal symptom-specific anxiety scores (p < 0.001 for all analyses). Those with lower quality of life had significantly higher healthcare usage and direct healthcare costs and more impairment in work and activities of daily living (p < 0.01 for all analyses). Avoidance of alcohol, lower educational level, abnormal anxiety, depression or somatoform symptom-reporting scores, and impairment in social leisure activities, home management or maintaining close relationships were all independently associated with lower quality of life.

CONCLUSION

IBS has a substantial impact on the quality of life of those affected, and worse than observed in some severe chronic organic conditions.