Functional defecation disorders in children: PACCT criteria versus Rome II criteria

被引:26
|
作者
Boccia, Gabrielln
Manguso, Francesco
Coccorullo, Paola
Masi, Paola
Pensabene, Licia
Staiano, Annamaria
机构
[1] Univ Naples Federico II, Dept Pediat, I-80131 Naples, Italy
[2] Univ Naples Federico II, Dept Clin & Expt Med, Naples, Italy
[3] Magna Graecia Univ Catanzaro, Dept Pediat, Catanzaro, Italy
来源
JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS | 2007年 / 151卷 / 04期
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.jpeds.2007.04.011
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
Objectives To evaluate the clinical validity and applicability of the Paris Consensus on Childhood Constipation Terminology (PACCT) versus the Rome 11 criteria for pediatric functional defecation disorders (FDDs). Study design Children from infancy to 17 years who had been referred to a tertiary center for chronic constipation were recruited for the study. A prospective longitudinal design was used. The Questionnaire on Pediatric Gastrointestinal Symptoms (QPGS) for parents of children age 0 to 4 and 4 to 17 years and for children age 10 to 17 years was used for diagnosis of FDDs. Results Children (n = 128; mean age, 67.2 months; 62 males) were screened consecutively. FDDs were diagnosed significantly more often by PACCT than by the Rome 11 criteria (112 [88.9%] vs 60 [47.6%]; P =.001). The agreement Cohen's kappa test showed k =.173. A statistically significant difference was reported between Rome 11 and PACCT in the 4- to 17-year-old group (P =.001). Seybalous, pebble-like stools and defecation with straining were the main symptoms reported (80%), followed by painful defecation (66%). Conclusions The PACCT criteria show greater applicability than the Rome 11 criteria for FDDs. The poor agreement implies that they do not identify the same types of patients. Because such a high percentage of constipated children reported the symptoms of defecation with straining, scybalous pebble-like stools, and painful defecation, including these symptoms in any revised criteria should be taken into consideration.
引用
收藏
页码:394 / 398
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Functional Defecation Disorders in Children: Comparing the Rome II with the Rome III Criteria
    Burgers, Rosa
    Levin, Alon D.
    Di Lorenzo, Carlo
    Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W.
    Benninga, Marc A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS, 2012, 161 (04): : 615 - +
  • [2] Functional defecation disorders constipation in children: Rome II vs Rome III criteria
    Boccia, G.
    Sarno, M. A.
    Masi, P.
    Turco, R.
    Pensabene, L.
    Staiano, A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC GASTROENTEROLOGY AND NUTRITION, 2007, 44 : 290 - 290
  • [4] FUNCTIONAL GASTROINTESTINAL DISORDERS: ROME II VERSUS ROME III CRITERIA
    Buonavolonta, R.
    Pensabene, L.
    Tramontano, A.
    Miele, E.
    Boccia, G.
    Gentile, T.
    Staiano, A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC GASTROENTEROLOGY AND NUTRITION, 2010, 50 : E77 - E77
  • [5] Functional digestive disorders: Intuitive diagnosis versus ROME II criteria
    Balboa, Agustin
    Mearin, Fermin
    Calleja, Jose Luis
    [J]. GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2008, 134 (04) : A421 - A421
  • [6] The Rome II criteria for patients with functional gastroduodenal disorders
    Tosetti, C
    Stanghellini, V
    Corinaldesi, R
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2003, 37 (01) : 92 - 93
  • [7] Use of Rome II versus Rome III criteria for diagnosis of functional constipation in young children
    Osatakul, Seksit
    Puetpaiboon, Areeruk
    [J]. PEDIATRICS INTERNATIONAL, 2014, 56 (01) : 83 - 88
  • [8] Use of Rome II criteria in childhood defecation disorders: Applicability in clinical and research practice
    Voskuijl, WP
    Heijmans, J
    Heimans, HSA
    Taminiau, JAJM
    Benninga, MA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS, 2004, 145 (02): : 213 - 217
  • [9] Reclassification of functional bowel disorders with Rome II diagnostic criteria
    Badiali, D
    Altobelli, G
    Corazziari, E
    [J]. GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2001, 120 (05) : A755 - A755
  • [10] The Rome III criteria of functional gastrointestinal disorders of children and adolescents
    Ryzko, Jozef
    [J]. PRZEGLAD GASTROENTEROLOGICZNY, 2008, 3 (02): : 79 - 86