There has been a change in the way IBS is diagnosed. I did not realize it until I read the recent article Diagnostic Testing in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Theory vs. Reality by Dr. Spiegel at UNC brought to our attention by Shawneric. Dr. Spiegel works with Dr. Drossman from UNC who is the President of the Rome Foundation . In the article he says
Quote: Guidelines State that IBS is Not a Diagnosis of Exclusion Despite the tendency to order diagnostic tests in the face of IBS symptoms, the diagnostic criteria for IBS, such as those supported by the Rome Committee, encourage clinicians to make a positive diagnosis on the basis of validated symptom criteria, and emphasize that IBS is not a diagnosis of exclusion despite the extensive list of other conditions that masquerade as IBS. This recommendation is based on extensive evidence that diagnostic testing is generally very low yield in patients with IBS who otherwise lack alarming signs or symptoms (e.g. blood in the bowel movements, unintended weight loss, anemia, etc). Studies show that meeting the Rome criteria for IBS nearly ensures a lack of underlying alternative conditions. Specifically, if a patient meets the criteria for having IBS, then there is a 98% chance that there is, in fact, IBS – and only a 2% chance that there is some other condition lurking in the background. So, patients should ask their physicians if they "meet the Rome criteria." If they do, then there is a 98% chance that their diagnosis is, indeed, IBS – not something else.
Apparently the new Rome III guidelines don't consider IBS to be a disorder determined by exclusion requiring a variety of tests including a colonoscopy if there are no alarming features. Go figure
-------------------- STABLE: ♂, IBS-D 50+ years - Science of IBS
Posts
Rome III criteria for IBS
