Psychosocial Aspects of Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders:

Experiences of Multidisciplinary Medical-Psychiatric Outpatient Care

Han Seung Ryu1, Seung-Ho Jang2, Yong Sung Kim1, Sang-Yeol Lee2, Suck Chei Choi1

1Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Wonkwang University Hospital, Digestive Disease Research Institute, Iksan, Republic of Korea, 2Department of Psychiatry, Wonkwang

University Hospital, Digestive Disease Research Institute, Iksan, Republic of Korea

Background

• This study is aimed to compare the psychosocial characteristics among patients with functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGID), adults with functional gastrointestinal symptoms and normal people, and investigate the factors related to therapeutic needs for FGID.

Methods

• 99 patients diagnosed with FGID in multidisciplinary medical-psychiatric outpatient care (Brain-Gut Stress Clinic) of Wonkwang University Hospital were selected as a FGID patient group, 87 adults who complained functional gastrointestinal symptoms were selected as a FGID-positive group and 79 adults were selected as a normal control group based on the Rome IV criteria.

• Demographic factors and psychosocial factors were evaluated using the Korean-Beck Depression Inventory-II, Korean-Beck Anxiety Inventory, Korean-Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ) and Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC).

• Student t-test, one-way ANOVA and logistic regression analysis were used to compare differences among groups.

Results

Results

Results

Results

Results

Conclusions

• In comparison of the FGID group (FGID patient + FGID-positive group) to the normal control group, the odd ratio (OR) of the FGID group was 8.047 in the high risk of anxiety group (95% CI: 2.37-27.28). In the high risk of emotional neglect of CTQ subscale, the OR of FGID was 2.023 (95% CI: 1.09-3.72).

• In resilience, there were differences in the sum of optimism (t=3.209, p<0.001). In comparison of the FGID patient to the FGID-positive group, the OR of the FGID patient group was 3.944 in the depression high risk group (95% CI: 1.68-9.20). Childhood trauma differed in the sum of physical neglect (t=-4.086, p<0.001). In the high risk of emotional neglect of CTQ subscale, the OR of FGID patient group was 3.27(95% CI: 1.75-6.08).

• In resilience, there were differences in the sum of CD-RISC (t=4.333, p<0.001), hardiness(t=2.881, p<0.01), persistence(t=4.196, p<0.001), optimism(t=6.071, p<0.001), support(t=2.726, p<0.01), and spiritual in nature(t=3.039, p<0.01).

Conclusions

• The FGID patients have distinctive psychosocial factors compared to the both FGID-positive and normal control group. Therefore, the active interventions for psychosocial factors are required in the treatment of patients with FGID.