A comparison of faecal incontinence scoring systems.

AIM: Questionnaires designed to score the severity of faecal incontinence (FI) are widely used to provide an evaluation of symptoms across settings, studies and time. The Pelvic Floor Disorders Consortium have recommended the use of multiple questionnaires despite some overlap of questions. This study aimed to evaluate whether patient responses to these questionnaires are consistent. METHOD: A retrospective analysis was undertaken of patients with FI who attended a dedicated pelvic floor unit between January 2018 and December 2019 and completed the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, Cleveland Clinic Florida Incontinence Score and St Mark's Incontinence Score simultaneously. For each questionnaire the frequency of incontinence episodes to solid stool, liquid stool and gas was divided into five categories to allow direct comparison. Answers were deemed equivalent if the allocated response was identical, slightly different if the response was in an adjacent category or very different if the response differed to a greater extent. RESULTS: There were 193 patients who simultaneously completed all three FI questionnaires. There were statistically significant differences between the responses regarding frequency of solid stool, liquid stool and gas incontinence on all three questionnaires (p < 0.005). Across all domains, between 58.0% and 69.9% of responses were equivalent, 14.1%-34.0% of answers were slightly different and 8.0%-18.8% were very different. CONCLUSION: Even when completed at the same time, and by the same person, similar questions are answered differently a significant proportion of the time. The utility of using multiple questionnaires simultaneously in the clinical setting to assess FI symptoms should be questioned.

The fecal incontinence quality of life scale (FIQL) and fecal incontinence severity index (FISI): Validation of the Dutch versions.

AIMS: Fecal incontinence (FI) is known to have a major impact on quality of life. The Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale (FIQL) and Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI) have been developed to assess this impact. The aim of this study was to validate the FIQL and FISI in the Dutch language. METHODS: The study population consisted of women and men experiencing FI and a reference group. The FIQL (four domains) and FISI questionnaires were validated by testing standardized measurement properties: discriminative ability, internal consistency, reproducibility, construct validity, and responsiveness. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients and 277 reference participants were included. Patients had significant lower and higher scores at the FIQL and FISI, respectively, than references (FIQL: 2.58 ± 0.70 and 3.92 ± 0.36, FISI: 38.57 ± 10.73 and 23.17 ± 15.01; P < 0.001), indicating worse functioning in patients and with this the discriminative abilities of the measures. The FIQL demonstrated adequate internal consistency on all domains (0.72-0.96), except for the embarrassment domain (0.55). The reproducibility was good for both measures. A negative correlation was found between the FIQL and FISI. Furthermore, the FIQL showed a positive (0.77) and the FISI a negative correlation (-0.31) with the Mental Component Summary scale of the SF-12. Responsiveness analysis showed a minimal important change of 0.40 points for the FIQL. CONCLUSIONS: Validity and reliability were good in the Dutch FIQL, but inconclusive in the FISI. The Dutch FIQL can support physicians in determining the impact of FI on patient's quality of life. Neurourol. Urodynam. 36:710-715, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

A Predictive Model to Identify Patients With Fecal Incontinence Based on High-Definition Anorectal Manometry.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Three-dimensional high-definition anorectal manometry (3D-HDAM) is used to assess anal sphincter function; it determines profiles of regional pressure distribution along the length and circumference of the anal canal. There is no consensus, however, on the best way to analyze data from 3D-HDAM to distinguish healthy individuals from persons with sphincter dysfunction. We developed a computer analysis system to analyze 3D-HDAM data and to aid in the diagnosis and assessment of patients with fecal incontinence (FI). METHODS: In a prospective study, we performed 3D-HDAM analysis of 24 asymptomatic healthy subjects (control subjects; all women; mean age, 39 ± 10 years) and 24 patients with symptoms of FI (all women; mean age, 58 ± 13 years). Patients completed a standardized questionnaire (FI severity index) to score the severity of FI symptoms. We developed and evaluated a robust prediction model to distinguish patients with FI from control subjects using linear discriminant, quadratic discriminant, and logistic regression analyses. In addition to collecting pressure information from the HDAM data, we assessed regional features based on shape characteristics and the anal sphincter pressure symmetry index. RESULTS: The combination of pressure values, anal sphincter area, and reflective symmetry values was identified in patients with FI versus control subjects with an area under the curve value of 1.0. In logistic regression analyses using different predictors, the model identified patients with FI with an area under the curve value of 0.96 (interquartile range, 0.22). In discriminant analysis, results were classified with a minimum error of 0.02, calculated using 10-fold cross-validation; different combinations of predictors produced median classification errors of 0.16 in linear discriminant analysis (interquartile range, 0.25) and 0.08 in quadratic discriminant analysis (interquartile range, 0.25). CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated a novel prediction model to analyze 3D-HDAM data. This system can accurately distinguish patients with FI from control subjects.

Factors that affect consultation and screening for fecal incontinence.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Fecal incontinence (FI) affects 15% of people age 70 years and older, but only 10% to 30% discuss FI with their physicians. We aimed to identify barriers that prevent people from consulting with their physicians, and that prevent physicians from screening for FI. METHODS: We performed structured interviews of 124 individuals with FI (mean age, 56 y; 87.9% women) recruited from 6 medical offices at the University of North Carolina Hospitals from June 2012 through March 2013. The subjects completed the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index and the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale questionnaires. Interview questions aimed to determine which patients had consulted physicians for FI. Eleven of the 56 physicians with patients included in the study responded to the survey. RESULTS: Eighty-eight of the 124 participants consulted with their physicians about FI (consulters). These individuals had a higher incidence of depression than the 36 subjects who did not consult with their physicians about FI (nonconsulters; P = .04), but similar Fecal Incontinence Severity Index scores. A smaller proportion of nonconsulters were aware of available treatments than consulters (P < .01). Fifty-six percent of nonconsulters said their FI was not serious enough to consult a physician. There was no difference between consulters and nonconsulters in embarrassment in talking about FI. Among consulters, 88% initiated the conversation about FI with their physician. Seven of the 11 responding physicians screened for FI, but only screened high-risk patients. The 4 physicians who did not screen for FI were unaware of its prevalence, viewed FI as a low priority, or stated that patients were responsible for reporting their own symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Based on surveys of physicians and patients, many patients have insufficient knowledge about the availability and effectiveness of treatments for FI. Some people with FI do not discuss it with their physician because their symptoms are mild, and most prefer physicians to ask them directly about FI. Educating patients and physicians about the prevalence of FI and management strategies may improve consultation rates.

Prospective Italian validation of the Vaizey and Wexner and fecal incontinence severity index (FISI) questionnaires.

Several objective severity measurement questionnaires of the fecal incontinence (FI), are available to describe type, frequency and degree of FI, and their impact on quality of life, aiming to establish baseline scores measure response to treatment over time and allow comparison among patients treated using different strategies. Presently, despite their widespread use in clinical practice, none of these questionnaire have been validated in the Italian language. The aim is to test the translated Italian version of the Vaizey and Wexner and Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI) questionnaires assessing their reliability and validity among Italian-speaking patients. Two researchers proficient in spoken English and Italian translated both questionnaires in the Italian language. They independently translated the two questionnaires from English and then they met to produce a single version of the two questionnaires, to solve any possible discrepancy. A forward-backward translation was then obtained by a professional bilingual translator, so as to define the final version of the questionnaires. The questionnaires were independently administered twice to 100 Italian-speaking patients by two different and independent raters. Cronbach's α of the first and second Vaizey and Wexner questionnaire was 0.755 and 0.727, respectively. While Cronbach's α of the first and second FISI questionnaire was 0.810 and 0.806, respectively. Spearman correlation and inter-rater reliability were 0.937 and 0.913 for Vaizey and Wexner questionnaire, respectively, and 0.915 and 0.871 for FISI questionnaire, respectively. Italian version of the Vaizey and Wexner and FISI questionnaires proved good consistency, reliability, reproducibility, showing good psychometric properties.

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy with sacrocolpopexy for coexisting pelvic organ prolapse and external rectal prolapse.

OBJECTIVES: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) POP is defined as the protrusion of pelvic organs from the vaginal canal. POP often coexists with internal rectal prolapse or external rectal prolapse (ERP). A series of patients with coexisting POP and ERP who underwent laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) combined with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) are reported here. METHODS: Seven patients underwent LVR and LSC together. Fecal incontinence was assessed by the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI), constipation was assessed by the Constipation Scoring System (CSS), and urinary incontinence was assessed by the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF). Anatomical disorders were assessed by Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) and defecography. RESULTS: The patients' median age was 81 (60-88) years. The median operative time was 380 (282-430) minutes. The median postoperative hospital stay was 3 (1-5) days. There were no postoperative complications. The FISI, CSS, POP-Q, and defecography findings improved postoperatively; however, the ICIQ-SF deteriorated in 2 of 5 patients. CONCLUSIONS: LVR combined with LSC for coexisting POP and ERP is feasible.

Supervised pelvic floor muscle training versus attention-control massage treatment in patients with faecal incontinence: Statistical analysis plan for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Faecal incontinence affects approximately 8-9% of the adult population. The condition is surrounded by taboo; it can have a devastating impact on quality of life and lead to major limitations in daily life. Pelvic floor muscle training in combination with information and fibre supplements is recommended as first-line treatment for faecal incontinence. Despite this, the effect of pelvic floor muscle training for faecal incontinence is unclear. No previous trials have investigated the efficacy of supervised pelvic floor muscle training in combination with conservative treatment and compared this to an attention-control massage treatment including conservative treatment. The aim of this trial is to investigate if 16 weeks of supervised pelvic floor muscle training in combination with conservative treatment is superior to attention-control massage treatment and conservative treatment in patients with faecal incontinence. DESIGN: Randomised, controlled, superiority trial with two parallel arms. METHODS: 100 participants with faecal incontinence will be randomised to either (1) individually supervised pelvic floor muscle training and conservative treatment or (2) attention-control massage treatment and conservative treatment. The primary outcome is participants' rating of symptom changes after 16 weeks of treatment using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement Scale. Secondary outcomes are the Vaizey Incontinence Score, the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale, a 14-day bowel diary, anorectal manometry and rectal capacity measurements. Follow-up assessment at 36 months will be conducted. DISCUSSION: This paper describes and discusses the rationale, the methods and in particular the statistical analysis plan of this trial.