Prospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2016.
World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther. Aug 6, 2016; 7(3): 447-452
Published online Aug 6, 2016. doi: 10.4292/wjgpt.v7.i3.447
Table 1 Demographic characteristics of the study population n (%)
Total IBDUCCD
Age at the diagnosis (yr)
≤ 102 (1.1)1 (0.7)1 (3.2)
11-1917 (9.2)13 (8.5)4 (12.9)
20-2942 (22.8)25 (16.3)17 (54.8)
30-3953 (28.8)49 (32.0)4 (12.9)
40-4939 (21.2)36 (23.5)3 (9.7)
50-5921 (11.4)19 (12.4)2 (6.5)
60-698 (4.3)8 (5.2)-
70-792 (1.1)2 (1.3)-
Gender
Male83 (45.1)62 (40.5)21 (67.7)
Female101 (54.9)91 (59.5)10 (32.3)
Education
Primary (Grade 1-5)40 (21.7)35 (22.9)5 (16.1)
Secondary (Grade 6-13)118 (64.1)101 (66.0)17 (54.8)
Higher (University or above)26 (14.1)17 (11.0)9 (29.0)
Employment
None72 (39.1)64 (41.8)8 (25.8)
Student11 (6.0)11 (7.2)-
Labourer63 (34.2)50 (32.7)13 (41.9)
Professional38 (20.7)28 (18.3)10 (32.3)
Table 2 Descriptive statistics for the four domains and overall score of the IBDQ-32 and categories
Minimum (Reference)Maximum (Reference)Mean
IBDQbowel105622.33
IBDQSystemic63412.5
IBDQEmotinal188434.87
IBDQSocial53512.3
IBDQTotal51 (32)215 (224)94.28
Table 3 Details of surgical procedures for inflammatory bowel disease
Surgical procedureIndicationn (%)
UC
Restorative proctocolectomy and ileoanal pouchSteriod resistance-7 Atypia on histology-4 Sigmoid colon cancer-112 (7.8)
Sigmoid colectomyStricture of sigmoid colon1 (0.7)
CD
Drainage and fistulectomyPerianal abscess and fistula1 (3.2)
Fistulectomy and repairRecurrent enterocutaneous fistula1 (3.2)
Incision and drainageR/Ischiorectal fossa abscess1 (3.2)
Repair of the fistulaEnrerocutaneous fistula2 (6.4)
R/hemicolectomy and ileo transverse anastomosisStrictures of the colon4 (12.9)
Total colectomy and ileostomyStrictures of colon2 (6.4)
Repair of the fistulaRecto vaginal fistula1 (3.2)
Strictureplasty, R/hemicolectomy and ileo transverseTwo long segment narrowings –distal ileum1 (3.2)
Anastomosismultiple narrowings > 10 in jejunum and proximal ileum and strictures of ascending colon-
Table 4 Correlation between quality of life components and incontinence scores
AssociationPearson correlation coefficient (Rho value)
IBDQbowel vs Vaizey score0.74
IBDQSystemic vs Vaizey score0.13
IBDQEmotinal vs Vaizey score0.09
IBDQSocial vs Vaizey score0.3
IBDQTotal vs Vaizey score0.61