Comparing diagnostic performance of Cantonese-Chinese version of Rome IV criteria and a short Reference Standard for functional dyspepsia in China.

INTRODUCTION

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is diagnosed based on self-reported symptoms and negative upper gastrointestinal endoscopic findings. The Rome criteria were not adopted as a diagnostic instrument in clinical guidelines due to their complexity. Different guidelines used relatively simple symptom assessment schemes with contents that vary significantly. A previously evaluated short Reference Standard may serve as a more standardised tool for guidelines. We evaluated its diagnostic accuracy against the Rome IV criteria in a cross-sectional study in Hong Kong.

METHODS

A total of 220 dyspeptic patients sampled consecutively from a tertiary hospital and the community completed the Rome IV diagnostic questionnaire, which was translated into Cantonese-Chinese, and the Reference Standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs), and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were calculated.

RESULTS

Among the participants, 160 (72.7%) fulfilled the Reference Standard with negative upper gastrointestinal endoscopic results. The Reference Standard identified patients with Rome IV-defined FD with 91.1% (95% CI 82.6%-96.4%) sensitivity and 37.6% (95% CI 29.6%-46.1%) specificity. The positive and negative LRs were 1.46 (95% CI 1.26-1.69) and 0.24 (95% CI 0.11-0.49), respectively. The AUC value was 0.64 (95% CI 0.59-0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

The Reference Standard can rule out patients without Rome IV-defined FD. It may be used as an initial screening tool for FD in settings where the use of the Rome IV criteria is impractical. It may also provide a uniform definition and diagnostic rule for future updates of clinical guidelines.