Thesis (Ph. D. in Psychology)--Vanderbilt University, Dec. 2009. / Title from title screen. Includes bibliographical references.

El texto completo de este trabajo no está disponible en el Repositorio Académico UPC por restricciones de la casa editorial donde ha sido publicado. / Revisión por pares

Abdominal pain of non-visceral origin has been recognised as a clinical entity for many years. In many gastroenterology clinics up to 50 per cent of patients attending have no pathological cause to their symptoms and such patients often become chronic attenders and suffer repeated investigation without resolution of their problem. They are often left with a label' of Irritable Bowel Syndrome (lBS) without a precise diagnosis being made. This is both unsatisfactory for the patient and physician. This study set out to determine the incidence of musculoskeletal causes of abdominal pain and to determine what diagnostic tools will help identify this group of patients and thus allow the physicians to refer the appropriate patients at an early stage. The aims were to identify questions that act as predictors of the presence of abdominal pain of musculoskeletal origin, patterns of pain presented in this group of patients and the ability of physiotherapists to detect cases of abdominal pain of musculoskeletal origin. The incidence of abdominal pain of musculoskeletal origin in this study was 14 per cent. Questions that act as predictors include an affirmative response to pain being aggravated by movements such as bending, twisting and turning, and coughing and sneezing, and a negative response to change in bowel habit, symptoms being aggravated by food and no weight change. The ability of the physiotherapist to detect cases was 88.3 per cent. No particular pattern of pain areas emerged to differentiate patients with abdominal pain of visceral and musculoskeletal causes. Early assessment of the musculoskeletal system by a trained physiotherapist is recommended. An early referral will lead to prompt and appropriate treatment and, consequently, to a reduction in costs for the NHS. For patients where the cause of their abdominal pain is not obvious it is unacceptable that they are left with the diagnosis of IBS without the musculoskeletal system being assessed. This study shows that such an assessment is vital to detect cases where the pain has a musculoskeletal origin.

Sclerosing mesenteritis is a rare autoimmune disease that eventually evolves into fibrotic changes that usually affect the adipose tissue around the mesenteric vessels. It can present through a myriad of gastroenterological as well as constitutional symptoms, including but not limited to abdominal pain, diarrhea, fever, nausea, or vomiting. Although the exact etiology of the disease is yet to be determined, there are several predisposing factors, the most common of which is a previous history of abdominal trauma and/or surgery. Several case series have reported the association of sclerosing mesenteritis with prior abdominal surgery ranging from as low as 24% to as high as 53%.

Acute pancreatitis is the most common serious complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) resulting in significant morbidity and occasional mortality. Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) has been recognized since ERCP was first performed, and many studies have shown a consistent risk that must be balanced against the many benefits of this procedure. This review will discuss the pathogenesis, epidemiology, potential risk factors, and clinical presentation of PEP. Moreover, it will discuss in detail the most recent updates of PEP prevention and management.

Bakgrund: IBS (Irritabel Bowel Syndrome) är en funktionell mag-tarmsjukdom, med en oklar patofysiologi och etiologi. IBS är en vanlig åkomma hos den västerländska befolkningen och karakteriseras av återkommande buksmärta/obehag, uppblåsthet, diarré och/eller förstoppning samt ökad gasbildning. Det finns idag inget botemedel för IBS, men intresset för probiotika som behandling vid IBS har på senare tid ökat. Probiotika, vilket definieras som levande mikroorganismer, som när de intas i adekvata mängder ger en hälsovinst hos värden tros ha en symptomatisk effekt vid IBS, och har därmed varit av intresse för behandling av IBS. Syfte: Syftet med denna litteraturstudie är att undersöka om probiotika har någon terapeutisk effekt och kan användas som behandling vid IBS. Metod: Fem randomiserade, dubbelblindade, placebo-kontrollerade studier granskades. De undersökte den terapeutiska effekten av varierande probiotika på IBS-patienter. Artiklarna erhölls genom sökningar i den medicinska databasen PubMed, under februari månad 2016. Resultat: Av dessa fem studier visade fyra på en signifikant symptomförbättring av framförallt buksmärta/obehag. Bäst resultat sågs i en studie som undersökte probiotikan Lactobacillus plantarum 299v. Tre av fem studier visade på en signifikant förbättring av testpersonernas livskvalité. I endast en av studierna, som undersökte effekten av Escherichia coli Nissle 1917, påvisades ingen signifikant skillnad mellan E.coli (probiotika) och placebo. Slutsats: Baserat på de fem studierna föreligger det i nuläget skäliga bevis för att en behandling med specifika probiotika kan ge symtomförbättring av buksmärta/obehag hos IBS-patienter, och förbättrar patienternas livskvalité. Vidare studier krävs för att fastställa den mest effektiva probiotikan, dosen och behandlingslängden. / Background: IBS (Irritable Bowel Syndrome) is a functional gastrointestinal disorder, with an unclear etiology and pathophysiology. IBS is a common disorder in the Western population and is characterized by recurrent abdominal pain/ discomfort, bloating, flatulence, diarrhea and/ or constipation. There is currently no cure for IBS, but the interest in probiotics as an option of treatment has recently increased. Probiotics have been defined as live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, provide a health benefit on the host, and are believed to have a symptomatic effect in IBS. Probiotics have therefore been of interest for the treatment in IBS. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine whether probiotics have a therapeutic effect and if it could be used as a treatment for IBS. Method: Five randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies were reviewed that examined the therapeutic effect of different probiotics in the IBS-patients. Articles were obtained through searches in the medical database PubMed, during the month of February 2016. Results: Four of the five studies showed a significant improvement of symptoms especially in abdominal pain/ discomfort. The best results were seen in a study that investigated the probiotic Lactobacillus plantarum 299v. Three of the five studies showed a significant improvement in quality of life (QOL) of the subjects in the study. One of the five studies which examined the effect of Escherichia coli Nissle 1917, there was no significant difference between E.coli (probiotics) and placebo. Conclusion: There is reasonable evidence that treatment with certain probiotics might provide improvement in symptoms of abdominal pain/ discomfort, and increase patients quality of life based on the five studies. Further studies are required to determine the most effective probiotic, dose and duration of IBS-treatment.

Os exames endoscópicos são considerados procedimentos invasivos, desconfortáveis e estressantes. A colonoscopia, em virtude da necessidade de laxantes para o preparo do cólon, de sua complexidade técnica e do constrangimento devido à maior exposição, causa ansiedade, preocupação e preconceito. No entanto, a colonoscopia é, atualmente, o procedimento de escolha para investigação de enfermidades do intestino grosso de elevada acurácia e possibilidade de realização de procedimentos terapêuticos, mas requer elevada colaboração e tolerância dos pacientes. A tolerância pode ser interpretada de várias maneiras, como aceitação, nível de satisfação e conforto durante o exame, ou disposição para repetir o procedimento. Foi realizado no Centro de Diagnóstico do Serviço de Gastroenterologia Clínica do Instituto Central do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, um estudo observacional prospectivo, longitudinal, com o objetivo de avaliar o nível de tolerância do paciente submetido à colonoscopia e os fatores intervenientes na tolerância. No período de março a dezembro de 2008, foram avaliados 373 pacientes adultos consecutivos, submetidos à colonoscopia eletiva. Foram incluídos pacientes submetidos a exames eletivos, com idade acima de 18 anos, com compreensão e aceitação da entrevista e do procedimento, e que assinaram o termo de consentimento livre e esclarecido. Um inquérito foi aplicado antes, durante e após o exame, a partir de dois questionários: formulário do paciente, preenchido pelo médico pesquisador; e ficha de avaliação médica, preenchido pelos médicos pesquisador e executante. No presente estudo considerou-se tolerância como a disposição do paciente para repetir o exame. Esse questionamento foi aplicado imediatamente na pré-alta, com o indivíduo desperto e orientado, no mínimo duas horas após o procedimento. Os fatores avaliados no pré-exame, durante o exame e no pós-exame foram comparados entre o grupo de pacientes tolerantes e os não tolerantes. Noventa e um por cento dos pacientes avaliados mostraram-se tolerantes à colonoscopia. Maiores níveis de tolerância foram observados em pacientes do sexo masculino (p=0,005; OR=14,8), com idade entre 41 anos e 60 anos (p=0,003; OR=56,92), colaborativos durante o exame (p=0,013; OR=6,15) e que não apresentaram cólica durante o preparo intestinal (p=0,013; OR=5) ou dor abdominal após o procedimento (p=0,032; OR=3,25). Um dos fatores limitantes do presente estudo foi o desconhecimento da razão pela qual o paciente não faria novamente o exame. A diferente graduação dos médicos colonoscopistas, a inclusão de pacientes ambulatoriais e internados submetidos à cirurgia colorretal tornaram a amostra heterogênea, porém mais representativa da prática clínica. Nessa amostra, a dor abdominal associada à colonoscopia foi o elemento mais significativo na caracterização da tolerância / Endoscopic assessments are considered invasive, uncomfortable and stressful procedures. The colonoscopy, due to the need for laxative use for colon preparation, its technical complexity and the embarrassment caused by privacy exposure, results in anxiety, concern and prejudice. However, the colonoscopy is currently the procedure of choice to investigate large bowel disorders, due to its high accuracy and the possibility of performing therapeutic procedures during the examination, but it requires a high degree of collaboration and compliance on the part of the patient. Tolerance can be interpreted in different ways, such as acceptance, level of satisfaction, and comfort during the examination, or willingness to have the procedure repeated. A prospective observational study was carried out at the Diagnostic Center of the Service of Clinical Gastroenterology of Instituto Central of Hospital das Clínicas of the School of Medicine of the University of São Paulo (HCFMUSP), aiming at evaluating the level of tolerance of patients submitted to colonoscopy and the factors that interfere with this tolerance. A total of 373 consecutive adult patients submitted to elective colonoscopy were studied from March to December 2008. The inclusion criteria consisted of patients submitted to elective examinations, aged 18 and older, which understood and agreed with the interview and the procedure and signed the Free and Informed Consent Form. A survey was applied before, during and after the examination, based on two questionnaires: the patients questionnaire, filled out by the medical researcher and the medical assessment file, filled out by the medical researcher and the attending physician. The present study considered the patients tolerance as the willingness to have the procedure repeated. This survey was applied immediately at the pre-hospital discharge, when the patient was conscious and oriented, at least two hours after the procedure. The factors assessed before, during and after the examination were compared between the groups of compliant and non-compliant patients. A total of 91% of the assessed patients showed to be compliant with the colonoscopy. Higher levels of tolerance were observed in male patients (p=0.005; OR=14.8), aged 41 to 60 years (p=0.003; OR=56.92), who collaborated during the examination (p=0.013; OR=6.15) and did not have colic during the intestinal preparation (p=0.013; OR=5) or abdominal pain after the procedure (p=0.032; OR=3.25). One limitation of the present study was the lack of information on why the patient would not have the procedure repeated. The varied degrees of skill presented by colonoscopists, the inclusion of outpatients and inpatients submitted to colorectal surgery made the sample a more heterogeneous one, albeit more representative of clinical practice. In this sample, abdominal pain associated with the colonoscopy was the most significant element in the characterization of tolerance

Os exames endoscópicos são considerados procedimentos invasivos, desconfortáveis e estressantes. A colonoscopia, em virtude da necessidade de laxantes para o preparo do cólon, de sua complexidade técnica e do constrangimento devido à maior exposição, causa ansiedade, preocupação e preconceito. No entanto, a colonoscopia é, atualmente, o procedimento de escolha para investigação de enfermidades do intestino grosso de elevada acurácia e possibilidade de realização de procedimentos terapêuticos, mas requer elevada colaboração e tolerância dos pacientes. A tolerância pode ser interpretada de várias maneiras, como aceitação, nível de satisfação e conforto durante o exame, ou disposição para repetir o procedimento. Foi realizado no Centro de Diagnóstico do Serviço de Gastroenterologia Clínica do Instituto Central do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, um estudo observacional prospectivo, longitudinal, com o objetivo de avaliar o nível de tolerância do paciente submetido à colonoscopia e os fatores intervenientes na tolerância. No período de março a dezembro de 2008, foram avaliados 373 pacientes adultos consecutivos, submetidos à colonoscopia eletiva. Foram incluídos pacientes submetidos a exames eletivos, com idade acima de 18 anos, com compreensão e aceitação da entrevista e do procedimento, e que assinaram o termo de consentimento livre e esclarecido. Um inquérito foi aplicado antes, durante e após o exame, a partir de dois questionários: formulário do paciente, preenchido pelo médico pesquisador; e ficha de avaliação médica, preenchido pelos médicos pesquisador e executante. No presente estudo considerou-se tolerância como a disposição do paciente para repetir o exame. Esse questionamento foi aplicado imediatamente na pré-alta, com o indivíduo desperto e orientado, no mínimo duas horas após o procedimento. Os fatores avaliados no pré-exame, durante o exame e no pós-exame foram comparados entre o grupo de pacientes tolerantes e os não tolerantes. Noventa e um por cento dos pacientes avaliados mostraram-se tolerantes à colonoscopia. Maiores níveis de tolerância foram observados em pacientes do sexo masculino (p=0,005; OR=14,8), com idade entre 41 anos e 60 anos (p=0,003; OR=56,92), colaborativos durante o exame (p=0,013; OR=6,15) e que não apresentaram cólica durante o preparo intestinal (p=0,013; OR=5) ou dor abdominal após o procedimento (p=0,032; OR=3,25). Um dos fatores limitantes do presente estudo foi o desconhecimento da razão pela qual o paciente não faria novamente o exame. A diferente graduação dos médicos colonoscopistas, a inclusão de pacientes ambulatoriais e internados submetidos à cirurgia colorretal tornaram a amostra heterogênea, porém mais representativa da prática clínica. Nessa amostra, a dor abdominal associada à colonoscopia foi o elemento mais significativo na caracterização da tolerância / Endoscopic assessments are considered invasive, uncomfortable and stressful procedures. The colonoscopy, due to the need for laxative use for colon preparation, its technical complexity and the embarrassment caused by privacy exposure, results in anxiety, concern and prejudice. However, the colonoscopy is currently the procedure of choice to investigate large bowel disorders, due to its high accuracy and the possibility of performing therapeutic procedures during the examination, but it requires a high degree of collaboration and compliance on the part of the patient. Tolerance can be interpreted in different ways, such as acceptance, level of satisfaction, and comfort during the examination, or willingness to have the procedure repeated. A prospective observational study was carried out at the Diagnostic Center of the Service of Clinical Gastroenterology of Instituto Central of Hospital das Clínicas of the School of Medicine of the University of São Paulo (HCFMUSP), aiming at evaluating the level of tolerance of patients submitted to colonoscopy and the factors that interfere with this tolerance. A total of 373 consecutive adult patients submitted to elective colonoscopy were studied from March to December 2008. The inclusion criteria consisted of patients submitted to elective examinations, aged 18 and older, which understood and agreed with the interview and the procedure and signed the Free and Informed Consent Form. A survey was applied before, during and after the examination, based on two questionnaires: the patients questionnaire, filled out by the medical researcher and the medical assessment file, filled out by the medical researcher and the attending physician. The present study considered the patients tolerance as the willingness to have the procedure repeated. This survey was applied immediately at the pre-hospital discharge, when the patient was conscious and oriented, at least two hours after the procedure. The factors assessed before, during and after the examination were compared between the groups of compliant and non-compliant patients. A total of 91% of the assessed patients showed to be compliant with the colonoscopy. Higher levels of tolerance were observed in male patients (p=0.005; OR=14.8), aged 41 to 60 years (p=0.003; OR=56.92), who collaborated during the examination (p=0.013; OR=6.15) and did not have colic during the intestinal preparation (p=0.013; OR=5) or abdominal pain after the procedure (p=0.032; OR=3.25). One limitation of the present study was the lack of information on why the patient would not have the procedure repeated. The varied degrees of skill presented by colonoscopists, the inclusion of outpatients and inpatients submitted to colorectal surgery made the sample a more heterogeneous one, albeit more representative of clinical practice. In this sample, abdominal pain associated with the colonoscopy was the most significant element in the characterization of tolerance

<p>The aim was to identify diagnostic difficulties for acute abdominal pain at the emergency department and during hospital stay. A total of 3349 patients admitted to Mora Hospital with acute abdominal pain of up to seven days duration, were registered prospectively for history and clinical signs according to a structured schedule. The preliminary diagnosis from the attending physician at the emergency department, any investigations or surgery and final diagnosis were registered at a follow-up after at least one year. </p><p>There were no differences in diagnostic performance between physicians with 0.5 to 5 years of medical experience. The information collected and a careful examination of the patient was more important than formal competence. The main differential diagnostic problem was non-specific abdominal pain; this was the same for diagnoses requiring surgery. Patients originally diagnosed as not needing surgery had a median delay before operation of 22 hours (mean 40 hours, with 95% confidence interval of 30-50 hours), compared to 8 hours (mean 15 hours, 95% confidence interval of 12-28 hours) for patients with the same final follow-up diagnosis as the preliminary diagnosis. Constipation was a diagnostic pitfall, as 9% of the patients considered constipated required surgery for potentially life threatening reasons and 8% were later found to have an abdominal malignancy. Both the preliminary diagnosis and the discharge diagnosis were less reliable for elderly patients than for younger patients. Elderly patients often had specific organ disease and arrived at the emergency department after a longer history of abdominal pain. </p><p>This study confirms that assessment of suspected appendicitis can still be based on clinical judgements combined with laboratory tests. Classical clinical findings indicating localised inflammation, such as isolated pain in the right iliac fossa, rebound tenderness, right-sided rectal tenderness, pain migration to the right iliac fossa, local guarding and aggravation of pain when moving, were reliable for predicting acute appendicitis. A CT scan can be saved for the more equivocal cases of acute abdominal pain. A generous strategy regarding CT scan among elderly patients with acute abdominal pain, even in the absence of pronounced signs of an inflammatory intra-abdominal process, is recommended.</p>

The objectives of this thesis were 1) to describe the occurrence and co-occurrence of recurrent pain (headache, stomach-ache, and backache) in young school children; 2) to describe Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in these children, from the perspective of the child, 3) to examine the psychometric properties of the PedsQL, a pediatric HRQoL instrument. Three data collections were performed, two in Umeå, Sweden, and one in a nearby smaller municipality, Lycksele. In Umeå, the first survey included schoolchildren from grades 0-6 and three years later all schoolchildren attending grade three and six were approached. In Lycksele all school children attending grades three through six and grade nine were invited to participate. Pain and quality of life were measured by questionnaires. The main findings of the thesis were that 2/3 of the children experienced pain from the head, stomach or back recurrently (at least monthly) and 1/3 experienced weekly pain. Weekly headache was reported by 23% of the children, 19 % reported weekly stomach-ache and 7% weekly backache. Half of the children with recurrent pain conditions reported pain from several body sites, and, in children with weekly pain, 2/3 reported multi-site pain. HRQoL in children with recurrent pain problems was markedly impaired, especially in children with multi-site pain and in children with weekly pain. Finally, The Swedish PedsQL self-report forms showed acceptable psychometric properties. In conclusion, in young schoolchildren, headache, stomach-ache and backache are common conditions associated with a clearly reduced HRQoL. The results show an urgent need for early preventive and curative programs targeting HRQoL domains such as physical, emotional, social and school areas. The results also indicate that recurrent pain should be regarded a potential general pain disorder rather than merely a local disorder. The PedsQL was found to be a reliable and valid measure of HRQoL in young Swedish school-aged children.