BACKGROUND/AIMS: We evaluated the distribution of lower and upper gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms among individuals with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) and chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) in a nationwide survey. METHODS: Individuals (≥ 18 years of age) were identified from a nationwide sample of > 70 000 United States adults. Participants completed the National Institutes of Health GI Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (NIH GI-PROMIS) questionnaire. Symptom frequency and intensity in the prior 7 days were assessed using validated PROMIS scores. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to compare symptom prevalence in IBS-C vs CIC, and one-way ANOVA was used to assess differences in PROMIS scores. Regression analysis was performed to adjust for demographic variables. RESULTS: Nine hundred and seventy adults met eligibility criteria (275 with IBS-C, 734 with CIC). Demographics were similar among groups except for education, marital and employment status, and income. Adjusting for demographic differences, GI-PROMIS scores of global GI symptoms were higher in IBS-C (251.1; 95% CI, 230.0–273.1) compared to CIC (177.8; 95% CI 167.2–188.4) (P < 0.001). Abdominal pain was more prevalent (OR, 4.3; 95% CI, 2.9–6.6) and more severe (P = 0.007) in IBS-C. Constipation was more severe in IBS-C (P = 0.011). Incontinence was more common (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.3–6.3) but just as severe (P = 0.389) in IBS-C versus CIC. Regarding upper GI symptoms, the prevalence of dysphagia, heartburn, and nausea were similar. However, IBS-C individuals had more severe heartburn (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: GI symptoms are generally more severe in IBS-C compared to CIC, however abdominal pain, bloating, and upper GI symptoms still commonly occur in CIC.
Abdominal Pain ; Adult ; Constipation ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Deglutition Disorders ; Demography ; Education ; Employment ; Heartburn ; Humans ; Information Systems ; Irritable Bowel Syndrome ; National Institutes of Health (U.S.) ; Nausea ; Odds Ratio ; Prevalence ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Symptom Assessment ; United States

Patient-generated reports, also known as Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs), capture the patients' illness experience in a structured format and may help bridge the gap between patients and providers. PROs measure any aspect of patient-reported health (e.g., physical, emotional or social symptoms) and can help to direct care and improve clinical outcomes. When clinicians systematically collect patient-reported data in the right place at the right time, PRO measurement can effectively aid in detection and management of conditions, improve satisfaction with care and enhance the patient-provider relationship. This review article summarizes the latest approaches to PRO measuring for clinical trials and clinical practice, with a focus on use of PROs in gastroenterology.
Gastroenterology ; Humans ; Hypogonadism ; Mitochondrial Diseases ; Ophthalmoplegia ; Quality of Life

Background/Aims: Patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) require extensive and personalized care to improve outcomes. ChatGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer), a large language model, holds the potential to provide professional yet patient-friendly support. We aimed to examine the accuracy and reproducibility of ChatGPT in answering questions regarding knowledge, management, and emotional support for cirrhosis and HCC. Methods: ChatGPT’s responses to 164 questions were independently graded by two transplant hepatologists and resolved by a third reviewer. The performance of ChatGPT was also assessed using two published questionnaires and 26 questions formulated from the quality measures of cirrhosis management. Finally, its emotional support capacity was tested. Results: We showed that ChatGPT regurgitated extensive knowledge of cirrhosis (79.1% correct) and HCC (74.0% correct), but only small proportions (47.3% in cirrhosis, 41.1% in HCC) were labeled as comprehensive. The performance was better in basic knowledge, lifestyle, and treatment than in the domains of diagnosis and preventive medicine. For the quality measures, the model answered 76.9% of questions correctly but failed to specify decision-making cut-offs and treatment durations. ChatGPT lacked knowledge of regional guidelines variations, such as HCC screening criteria. However, it provided practical and multifaceted advice to patients and caregivers regarding the next steps and adjusting to a new diagnosis. Conclusions We analyzed the areas of robustness and limitations of ChatGPT’s responses on the management of cirrhosis and HCC and relevant emotional support. ChatGPT may have a role as an adjunct informational tool for patients and physicians to improve outcomes.