4.1 Article

Prevalence and predictors of irritable bowel syndrome among medical students and interns in King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah

Journal

LIBYAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3402/ljm.v8i0.21287

Keywords

epidemiology; irritable bowel syndrome; medical students; Jeddah

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a frequent, costly, and potentially disabling gastrointestinal disorder. Medical education is among the most challenging and the most stressful education, and this may predispose to high rates of IBS. Objective: To determine the prevalence and predictors of IBS among medical students and interns in King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 597 medical students and interns selected by multistage stratified random sample method in 2012. A confidential, anonymous, and self-administered questionnaire was used to collect personal and sociodemographic data, level of emotional stress, and food hypersensitivity during the past 6 months. Rome III Criteria and the Standardized Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale were also used. Results: The prevalence of IBS was 31.8%. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that the first predictor of IBS was female gender (aOR = 2.89; 95.0% CI: 1.65-5.05). The second predictor was presence of morbid anxiety (aOR = 2.44; 95.0% CI: 1.30-4.55). Living in a school dormitory, emotional stress during 6 months preceding the study, and the academic year were the next predictors. Conclusions: High prevalence of IBS prevailed among medical students and interns. Female gender, morbid anxiety, living in school dormitory, emotional stress, and higher educational level (grade) were the predictors of IBS. Screening of medical students for IBS, psychological problems, and reducing stress by stress management are recommended.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available