Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 809

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Patient and surgeon ranking of the severity of symptoms associated with fecal incontinence: The fecal incontinence severity index

Rockwood, Todd H., Church, James M., Fleshman, James W., Kane, Robert L., Mavrantonis, Constantinos, Thorson, Alan G., Wexner, Steven D., Bliss, Donna, Lowry, Ann C.·1999·Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
DOI 10.1007/bf02236199
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this research was to develop and evaluate a severity rating score for fecal incontinence, the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index. METHODS: The Fecal Incontinence Severity Index is based on a type x frequency matrix. The matrix includes four types of leakage commonly found in the fecal incontinent population: gas, mucus, and liquid and solid stool and five frequencies: one to three times per month, once per week, twice per week, once per day, and twice per day. The Fecal Incontinence Severity Index was developed using both colon and rectal surgeons and patient input for the specification of the weighting scores. RESULTS: Surgeons and patients had very similar weightings for each of the type x frequency combinations; significant differences occurred for only 3 of the 20 different weights. The Fecal Incontinence Severity Index score of a group of patients with fecal incontinence (N = 118) demonstrated significant correlations with three of the four scales found in a fecal incontinence quality-of-life scale. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index indicates that the index is a tool that can be used to assess severity of fecal incontinence. Overall, patient and surgeon ratings of severity are similar, with minor differences associated with the accidental loss of solid stool.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02236199

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. Smith M. Severity. In: Kane RL, ed. Understanding health care outcomes research. Gaithersburg: Aspen Publishers, 1997:129–52.
  2. Jamieson JR, Stein HJ, DeMeester TR,et al. Ambulatory 24-h esophageal pH monitoring: normal values, optimal thresholds, specificity, sensitivity, and reproducibility [see comments]. Am J Gastroenterol 1992;87:1102–11.
  3. Shelton A, Madoff R. Defining anal incontinence: establishing a uniform continence scale. Semin Colon Rectal Surg 1997;8:54–60.
  4. Felt-Bersma RJ, Klinkenberg-Knol EC, Meuwissen SG. Anorectal function investigations in incontinent and continent patients. Differences and discriminatory value. Dis Colon Rectum 1990;33:479–85; discussion 485–6. · doi:10.1007/bf02052142
  5. Rogers, J, Henry MM, Misiewicz JJ. Combined sensory and motor deficit in primary neuropathic faecal incontinence. Gut 1988;29:5–9. · doi:10.1136/gut.29.1.5
  6. Tjandra J, Sharma B, McKirdy H,et al. Anorectal physiology testing in defecatory disorders: a prospective study. Aust N Z J Surg 1994;64:322–6. · doi:10.1111/j.1445-2197.1994.tb02219.x
  7. Gilliland R, Altomare DF, Moreira H Jr,et al. Pudendal neuropathy is predictive of failure following anterior overlapping sphincteroplasty. Dis Colon Rectum 1998;41:1516–22. · doi:10.1007/bf02237299
  8. Bartram C, Law P. Anal endosonography: technique and application. Adv Gastrointest Radiol 1991;1:101–15.
  9. Brodén G, Dolk A, Holmström B. Recovery of the internal anal sphincter following rectopexy: a possible explanation for continence improvement. Int J Colorectal Dis 1988;3:23–8. · doi:10.1007/bf01649678
  10. Corman ML. Gracilis muscle transposition for anal incontinence: late results. Br J Surg 1985;72(Suppl):S21–2. · doi:10.1002/bjs.1800721314
  11. Rainey, JB, Donaldson DR, Thomson JP. Postanal repair: which patients derive most benefit? J R Coll Surg Edinb 1990;35:101–5.
  12. Rudd WW. The transanal anastomosis: a sphincter-saving operation with improved continence. Dis Colon Rectum 1979;22:102–5. · doi:10.1007/bf02586772
  13. Womack NR, Morrison JF, Williams NS. Prospective study of the effects of postanal repair in neurogenic faecal incontinence. Br J Surg 1988;75:48–52. · doi:10.1002/bjs.1800750118
  14. Kelly JH. Cine radiography in anorectal malformations. J Pediatr Surg 1969;4:538–46. · doi:10.1016/0022-3468(69)90094-3
  15. Holschneider AM. Treatment and functional results of anorectal continence in children with imperforate anus. Acta Chir Belg 1983;82:191–204.
  16. Lunniss PJ, Kamm MA, Phillips RK. Factors affecting continence after surgery for anal fistula. Br J Surg 1382;81:1382–5. · doi:10.1002/bjs.1800810947
  17. Rothenberger D. Anal incontinence. In: Cameron JL, ed. Current surgical therapy. Philadelphia: Decker Mosby, 1984:185–94.
  18. Miller R, Bartolo DC, Locke-Edmunds JC, Mortensen NJ. Prospective study of conservative and operative treatment for faecal incontinence. Br J Surg 1988;75:101–5. · doi:10.1002/bjs.1800750204
  19. Jorge JM, Wexner SD. Etiology and management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 1993;36:77–97. · DOI · Paper page
  20. Pescatori M, Anastasio G, Bottini C, Mentasti A. New grading and scoring for anal incontinence: evaluation of 335 patients. Dis Colon Rectum 1992;35:482–7. · doi:10.1007/bf02049407
  21. Rockwood TH, Church JM, Fleshman JW,et al. FIQL: a quality of life instrument for patients with fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum (in press).
  22. Kane R, Rockwood T, Finch M, Philp I. Consumer and professional ratings of the importance of functional status components. Health Care Financing Rev 1997;19:11–22.

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Rockwood, T. H., Church, J. M., Fleshman, J. W., Kane, R. L., Mavrantonis, C., Thorson, A. G., Wexner, S. D., Bliss, D., & Lowry, A. C.
Venue
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
1999-12
Volume
42
Issue
12
Pages
1525-1531
ISSN
0012-3706 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1007/bf02236199
OpenAlex
W2791615973
Cited by
809
References
0
FWCI
5.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.