Abstract
ObjectivesDespite being proposed 4 years ago, there has been no independent validation study of the Rome IV criteria for IBS. We assessed their performance for the diagnosis of IBS in secondary care and compared them with the previous iteration, the Rome III criteria.DesignWe collected complete symptom data from consecutive adult patients with suspected IBS referred to a single UK clinic. All subjects underwent relatively standardised workup, with assessors blinded to symptom status. The reference standard used to confirm IBS was the presence of lower abdominal pain or discomfort in association with altered stool form or frequency, in a patient with no evidence of organic gastrointestinal disease after investigation. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs), with 95% CIs, were calculated for each of the diagnostic criteria.ResultsThe level of agreement between the Rome IV and Rome III criteria was good (kappa=0.65). Compared with the reference standard, sensitivity and specificity of the Rome IV criteria in 572 patients (431 (75.3%) women, mean age 36.5 years) were 82.4% and 82.9%, respectively. Positive and negative LRs for the Rome IV criteria were 4.82 (95% CI 3.30 to 7.28) and 0.21 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.26), respectively. The Rome IV criteria performed best in those with IBS with constipation or mixed bowel habits. In 471 patients (350 (74.3%) women, mean age 36.7 years), compared with the reference standard, the sensitivity and specificity of the Rome III criteria were 85.8% and 65.0%; positive and negative LRs were 2.45 (95% CI 1.90 to 3.27) and 0.22 (0.16 to 0.29), respectively. Incorporating mood and extraintestinal symptom reporting into diagnostic criteria did not improve their performance significantly.ConclusionsThe Rome IV criteria performed significantly better than the Rome III criteria in diagnosing IBS in this single centre secondary care study, although the clinical relevance of this is uncertain.
Reference55 articles.
1. Rome IV-functional Gi disorders: disorders of gut-brain interaction;Drossman;Gastroenterology,2016
2. Bowel disorders;Mearin;Gastroenterology,2016
3. Worldwide prevalence and burden of functional gastrointestinal disorders, results of Rome Foundation global study;Sperber;Gastroenterology,2020
4. Screening for celiac disease in irritable bowel syndrome: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis;Irvine;Am J Gastroenterol,2017
5. Prevalence of irritable bowel syndrome-type symptoms in patients with celiac disease: a meta-analysis;Sainsbury;Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol,2013
Cited by
44 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