The Constipation Severity Instrument: A Validated Measure

Purpose This study was designed to develop and test the validity and reliability of the Constipation Severity Instrument. Methods Scale development was conducted in two stages: 1) 74 items were generated through a literature review and focus groups of constipated patients and medical providers; and 2) a preliminary instrument was administered to 191 constipated patients and 103 healthy volunteers. Test-retest reliability of the constipated group was assessed (N = 90). Content, convergent, divergent, and discriminant validity were evaluated by using other validated measures by performing one-way analysis of variance and Pearson correlations. Results Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis revealed three subscales: obstructive defecation, colonic inertia, and pain. Internal consistency (α = 0.88–0.91) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.84–0.91) were high for all subscales. Constipated patients were grouped by Rome II criteria: functional constipation (22 percent), pelvic floor dyssynergia (15 percent), constipation predominant irritable bowel syndrome (23 percent), and no specific criteria (40 percent). Those with constipation predominant irritable bowel syndrome or pelvic floor dyssynergia scored higher on the Obstructive Defecation and Colonic Inertia subscales than those with functional constipation or no specific criteria (P = 0.001–0.058). Subjects with functional constipation had much lower scores on the pain subscale than constipation predominant irritable bowel syndrome, functional constipation, or no specific criteria (P < 0.009).The Constipation Severity Instrument subscale and total score correlated very highly with the subscales and total score of the Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptom measure. The Constipation Severity Instrument subscales discriminated well between constipated patients and healthy volunteers (P < 0.001) and demonstrated excellent divergent validity. Higher Constipation Severity Instrument scores inversely correlated with general quality of life. Conclusions The Constipation Severity Instrument is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing constipated patients. Administration of the Constipation Severity Instrument to other constipated patients will further validate its use. Supported by the University of California San Francisco Hellman Family Award for Early Career Faculty. Read at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, St. Louis, Missouri, June 2 to 6, 2007. Reprints are not available.     

Chronic Q fever endocarditis.

Eight patients with chronic Q fever endocarditis were treated with tetracycline for up to 40 months. In addition, five of these patients received co-trimoxazole. Six patients had prosthetic valves. Two patients who had Q fever endocarditis on their native valves required valve replacement because of haemodynamic difficulties: in only one did the Q fever endocarditis contribute to the haemodynamic difficulty. One patient died. It is suggested that medical treatment is continued until clinically and haematologically there is no evidence of endocarditis and the Q fever phase 1 antibody titre is less than 200. No recurrence of Q fever endocarditis has been detected in three of our patients who have now stopped treatment.     

Noninvasive detection of multivessel disease after myocardial infarction by exercise radionuclide ventriculography

The ability of exercise radionuclide ventriculography to detect multivessel coronary artery disease in patients who survived a single myocardial infarction was assessed. Seventy-four patients who had had myocardial infarction at least 8 weeks earlier underwent cardiac catheterization and exercise radionuclide ventriculography. Thirty-eight patients had had an inferior infarction: 25 with multivessel disease and 13 with single vessel disease of the right coronary artery. Thirty-six patients had had an anterior infarction: 26 with multivessel disease and 10 with single vessel disease of the left anterior descending coronary artery.

Among patients with anterior infarction there was no significant difference between patients with single vessel disease and patients with multivessel disease with regard to resting ejection fraction, exercise ejection fraction, and the mean change from rest to exercise. Patients with single vessel disease had a decrease in ejection fraction from rest to exercise of 2.2 ± 2.7% units (mean) ± standard error [SE]), compared with a decrease of 5.4 ±1.3% units in those with multivessel disease (p = not significant [NS]). Seventeen of 26 (65%) patients with multivessel disease and 6 of 10 (60%) with single vessel disease had a decrease in ejection fraction of at least 5 percentage units (p = NS).

In patients with inferior infarction there was no difference in the mean resting ejection fraction in those with single vessel disease (53 ± 2%) compared with those with multivessel disease (50 ±2%); however, the mean exercise ejection fraction in patients with single vessel disease (57 ± 3%) was significantly higher (p < 0.005) than that in patients with multivessel disease (45 ± 2%). Sixteen of the 25 patients with multivessel disease (64%) but only 1 patient with single vessel disease (7.7%) had a decrease in ejection fraction of at least 5 percentage units (p < 0.001).

A new wall motion abnormality developed in 8 patients with anterior infarction and 11 with inferior infarction with multivessel disease and none with single vessel disease. The sensitivity and specificity in predicting multivessel disease using the criteria of the development of a new wall motion abnormality or a decrease in ejection fraction with exercise of at least 5 percentage units were 80 and 92% for the patients with inferior infarction, but only 69 and 40% for the patients with anterior infarction.

These results suggest that exercise radionuclide angiography can be used to discriminate between single and multivessel disease after inferior myocardial infarction. For patients with anterior infarction, only a new abnormality in wall motion accurately predicts multivessel disease, but this occurred in only one third of such patients.     

Electrocardiographic imaging of cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: observation of variable electrophysiologic responses.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) for congestive heart failure patients with delayed left ventricular (LV) conduction is clinically beneficial in approximately 70% of patients. Unresolved issues include patient selection, lead placement, and efficacy of LV pacing alone. Being an electrical approach, detailed electrical information during CRT is critical to resolving these issues. However, electrical data from patients have been limited because of the requirement for invasive mapping. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to provide observations and insights on the variable electrophysiologic responses of the heart to CRT using electrocardiographic imaging (ECGI). METHODS: ECGI is a novel modality for noninvasive epicardial mapping. ECGI was conducted in eight patients undergoing CRT during native rhythm and various pacing modes. RESULTS: In native rhythm (six patients), ventricular activation was heterogeneous, with latest activation in the lateral LV base in three patients and in the anterolateral, midlateral, or inferior LV in the remainder of patients. Anterior LV was susceptible to block and slow conduction. Right ventricular pacing improved electrical synchrony in two of six patients. LV pacing in three of four patients involved fusion with intrinsic excitation resulting in electrical resynchronization similar to biventricular pacing. Although generally electrical synchrony improved significantly with biventricular pacing, it was not always accompanied by clinical benefit. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that (1) when accompanied by fusion, LV pacing alone can be as effective as biventricular pacing for electrical resynchronization; (2) right ventricular pacing is not effective for resynchronization; and (3) efficacy of CRT depends strongly on the patient-specific electrophysiologic substrate.