Clinical triage for colonoscopy is useful in young women.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is an invasive procedure and a limited resource. It is therefore desirable to restrict its use to those in whom it yields an important diagnosis, without missing pathology in others. AIM: The aim of this study was to determine whether standard clinical criteria can be used to reliably distinguish when colonoscopy is advisable in women 30 years and younger. METHODS: A retrospective audit was performed at a single centre of 100 consecutive colonoscopies performed in women 30 years old and younger. The indications for the colonoscopy were recorded, and divided into clear and relative indications. The primary outcome of whether an endoscopic diagnosis was made was compared between the two groups. Clear indications for colonoscopy included overt rectal bleeding, elevated inflammatory markers, anaemia, iron deficiency and strong family history of colorectal cancer. Relative indications included abdominal pain or discomfort, bloating and altered bowel habit/motions. RESULTS: The average age was 23 years. Sixty women had both relative and clear indications. Eleven had only clear indications and 28 only relative indications. Altogether, 58 colonoscopies were normal, and 17 showed inflammatory bowel disease. No subject with only relative indications had an abnormal finding (0/28). The diagnostic yield was significantly different between those with only relative indications (0%) versus those with at least one clear indication (59%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Standard clinical criteria can be used to restrict safely the use of colonoscopy in young women. This will avoid performing procedures in people without clear indications, saving costs, resources and complications.

Comparison of endoscopic findings with symptom assessment systems (FSSG and QUEST) for gastroesophageal reflux disease in Japanese centres.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We compared endoscopic findings of the frequency scale for the symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (FSSG), a written questionnaire developed in Japan, to that for the questionnaire for the diagnosis of reflux esophagitis (QUEST) for the diagnosis of reflux esophagitis. METHODS: We registered 475 patients with untreated symptoms of upper abdominal pain (male/female: 252/223, average age 52.4 +/- 17.8 years). Subjects were assessed first with the FSSG and QUEST questionnaires, then by endoscopy, before allocation to a gastric ulcer (GU), duodenal ulcer (DU), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or functional dyspepsia (FD) group. RESULTS: On the basis of the endoscopic findings the diagnoses for the 475 subjects were as follows: FD 52.2%, DU 7.6%, GU 7.8%, and GERD 32.4% (Grade M 10.1%, Grade A + B 20.2%, Grade C + D 2.3%). There was no difference between the FSSG and QUEST in sensitivity, specificity or accuracy for any condition. The FSSG score rose with increasing endoscopic severity of GERD, but there was no correlation between the QUEST score and endoscopic severity. The FSSG total score was inferior to QUEST in terms of distinguishing GERD from other conditions, but when only the questions relating to reflux symptoms were used, the FSSG was able to distinguish GERD from other conditions as well as QUEST. CONCLUSIONS: The FSSG score reflects the severity of the endoscopic findings of GERD.

Systematic reviews of clinical decision tools for acute abdominal pain.

OBJECTIVES: To review for acute abdominal pain (AAP), the diagnostic accuracies of combining decision tools (DTs) and doctors aided by DTs compared with those of unaided doctors. Also to evaluate the impact of providing doctors with an AAP DT on patient outcomes, clinical decisions and actions, what factors are likely to determine the usage rates and usability of a DT and the associated costs and likely cost-effectiveness of these DTs in routine use in the UK. DESIGN: Electronic databases were searched up to 1 July 2003. REVIEW METHODS: Data from each eligible study were extracted. Potential sources of heterogeneity were extracted for both questions. For the accuracy review, meta-analysis was conducted. Among studies comparing diagnostic accuracies of DTs with unaided doctors, error rate ratios provided estimates of the differences between the false-negative and false-positive rates of the DT and unaided doctors' performance. Pooled error rate ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for false-negative rates and false-positive rates were computed. Metaregression was used to explore heterogeneity. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies from 27 articles, all based in secondary care, were eligible for the review of DT accuracies, while two were eligible for the review of the accuracy of hospital doctors aided by DTs. Sensitivities and specificities for DTs ranged from 53 to 99% and from 30 to 99%, respectively. Those for unaided doctors ranged from 64 to 93% and from 39 to 91%, respectively. Thirteen studies reported false-positive and false-negative rates for both DTs and unaided doctors, enabling a direct comparison of their performance. In random effects meta-analyses, DTs had significantly lower false-positive rates (error rate ratio 0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.83) than unaided doctors. DTs may have higher false-negative rates than unaided doctors (error rate ratio 1.34, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.93). Significant heterogeneity was present. Two studies compared the diagnostic accuracies of doctors aided by DTs to unaided doctors. In a multiarm cluster randomised controlled trial (n = 5193), the diagnostic accuracy of doctors not given access to DTs was not significantly worse (sensitivity 28.4% and specificity 96.0%) than that of three groups of aided doctors (sensitivities of 42.4-47.9%, and specificities of 95.5-96.5%, respectively). In an uncontrolled before-and-after study (n = 1484), the sensitivities and specificities of aided and unaided doctors were 95.5% and 91.5% (p = 0.24) and 78.1% and 86.4% (p < 0.001), respectively. The metaregression of DTs showed that prospective test-set validation at the site of the tool's development was associated with considerably higher diagnostic accuracy than prospective test-set validation at an independent centre [relative diagnostic odds ratio (RDOR) 8.2; 95% CI 3.1 to 14.7]. It also showed that the earlier in the year the study was performed the higher the performance (RDOR 0.88, 0.83 to 0.92), that when developers evaluated their own DT there was better performance than when independent evaluators carried out the study (RDOR = 3.0, 1.3 to 6.8), and that there was no evidence of association between other quality indicators and DT accuracy. The one eligible study of the impact study review, a four-arm cluster randomised trial (n = 5193), showed that hospital admission rates of patients by doctors not allocated to a DT (42.8%) were significantly higher than those by doctors allocated to three combinations of decision support (34.2-38.5%) (p < 0.001). There was no evidence of a difference between perforation rates (p = 0.19) and negative laparotomy rates in the four trial arms (p = 0.46). Usage rates of DTs by doctors in accident and emergency departments ranged from 10 to 77% in the six studies that reported them. Possible determinants of usability include the reasoning method used, the number of items used and the output format. A deterministic cost-effectiveness comparison demonstrated that a paper checklist is likely to be 100-900 times more cost-effective than a computer-based DT, under stated assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: With their significantly greater specificity and lower false-positive rates than doctors, DTs are potentially useful in confirming a diagnosis of acute appendicitis, but not in ruling it out. The clinical use of well-designed, condition-specific paper or computer-based structured checklists is promising as a way to improve impact on patient outcomes, subject to further research.

Munchausen syndrome in obstetrics and gynecology.

Munchausen syndrome (MS) is a well-defined clinical psychiatric entity. Furthermore, it is a complicated and intriguing problem in medicine in general and in obstetrics and gynecology in particular. The proportion of MS cases in obstetrics and gynecology is rising. This review covers relevant reports from the last four decades. Emphasis is put on the clinical expression of MS cases in obstetrics and gynecology. A discussion about their validity as such is included. Awareness of attending physicians to this type of illness in the era of patient rights, on the one hand, and the existence of defensive medicine on the other, is crucial.