4.5 Article

Hypervigilance in irritable bowel syndrome compared with organic gastrointestinal disease

Journal

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOSOMATIC RESEARCH
Volume 66, Issue 5, Pages 399-405

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2008.09.020

Keywords

Irritable bowel syndrome; Hypervigilance; Selective attention

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients are suggested to selectively attend to gastrointestinal (GI) sensations compared with healthy controls. However, it remains unclear whether there are differences between IBS and other chronic GI disorders. We aimed to evaluate the presence of hypervigilance towards the GI tract in IBS compared with patients with organic GI diseases. Methods: We included 36 IBS patients and 40 age- and gender-matched patients with organic GI disease. They completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and underwent three tests: (1) word association-write down as many words as possible representing signs of disease; (2) word recognition (tachistoscope)-four categories of words (positive affects, non-GI symptoms, GI symptoms, negative affects) displayed for increasing time until identified; (3) word recollection-memorize words (10 GI symptoms, 10 positive affects, 10 negative affects). Results: The word-association task did not show group differences. IBS patients were significantly faster than organic GI patients at recognizing words representing GI symptoms (21 vs. 26 ms; P=.04) and negative affects (27 vs. 34 ms; P=.03), but also tended to be faster at recognizing positive affects (24 vs. 29 ms; P=.08) and non-GI symptoms (22 vs. 27 ms; P=.2). Both groups remembered a similar number of words, but IBS patients tended to recall more incorrect GI words than organic patients (1.3 vs. 1.0; P=.06). There were no group differences in HADS scores. Conclusion: Compared to patients with organic GI disease, IBS patients seem to be hypervigilant for information regarding GI sensations and maybe also negative information. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available