Diagnostic accuracy of gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire for gastroesophageal reflux disease: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Author:

Simadibrata Daniel Martin12ORCID,Ngadiono Eko1,Sinuraya Fira Alyssa Gabriella1,Damara Ivan1,Fass Ronnie3ORCID,Simadibrata Marcellus4

Affiliation:

1. Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia Jakarta Indonesia

2. Nuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH) University of Oxford Oxford UK

3. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, MetroHealth System Case Western Reserve University Cleveland Ohio USA

4. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia—Ciptomangunkusumo Hospital Jakarta Indonesia

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe use of a symptom‐based gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) questionnaire (GerdQ) for GERD diagnosis has gained interest due to its greater efficacy and ease of use than other available questionnaires. However, different guidelines have given inconsistent recommendations regarding using GerdQ as a diagnostic test. This meta‐analysis summarized the diagnostic accuracy of GerdQ for diagnosing GERD.MethodsStudies published up to April 12, 2023, and indexed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched. Diagnostic test accuracy studies comparing GerdQ with upper endoscopy and/or pH‐metry for GERD diagnosis in adult patients with symptoms suggestive of GERD were included. The study quality was assessed using the QUADAS‐2 tool. Meta‐analysis using bivariate (Reitsma) analysis was done to summarize the overall sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LRs), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). The summary receiver operating characteristics (SROC) curve was visualized, and the area under the ROC (AUC) was calculated.Key ResultsA total of 13 studies with 11,166 participants were included in the meta‐analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, and DOR for GerdQ (cut‐off value of ≥8) were 66.9% (95% CI 56.4%–73.1%), 65.2% (95% CI 56.4%–73.1%), 1.93 (95% CI 1.55–2.42), 0.51 (95% CI 0.38–0.66), and 3.89 (95% CI 2.44–5.89), respectively. The overall AUC from the SROC was 0.705. The subgroup analysis showed similar pooled sensitivity, specificity, and DOR between Asian and non‐Asian studies.Conclusions & InferencesGerdQ had moderate sensitivity and specificity for GERD diagnosis. GerdQ can still be recommended as a diagnostic tool for GERD, especially when the PPI test is unavailable or contraindicated.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Gastroenterology,Endocrine and Autonomic Systems,Physiology

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3