Alexander T. Reddy, S. Posner, Matthew Harbrecht, Nicholas Koutlas, Jonathan Reichstein, Sarah Cantrell, D. Leiman
{"title":"Reflux Disease Questionnaire Scoring and Utilization: A Scoping Review","authors":"Alexander T. Reddy, S. Posner, Matthew Harbrecht, Nicholas Koutlas, Jonathan Reichstein, Sarah Cantrell, D. Leiman","doi":"10.1177/26345161231198622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The RDQ was developed to assist in diagnosing GERD, but is now widely used in multiple contexts and validated in several languages. However, there is no standard RDQ scoring rubric, making comparisons between its uses challenging. Therefore, we performed a scoping review to explore the current applications and scoring cutoffs of the RDQ. The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science electronic databases were systematically searched from January 2001 to January 2021 by a medical librarian using controlled vocabulary terms and keywords to identify experimental and observational study designs. The search strategy yielded 5707 studies and 116 met inclusion criteria yielding a total patient population of 115 064. Studies utilized the RDQ to establish a GERD diagnosis (n = 52, 45%), report the prevalence of GERD symptoms within a specific population (n = 21, 18%), and assess the effect of an intervention on symptoms (n = 43, 37%). There was variability between the scoring threshold used for diagnosing GERD, with total GERD domain score ≥12 being the most commonly used (n = 16, 14%). The RDQ was designed as an aid for diagnosing GERD, but scoring methods and thresholds vary and the RDQ now is used to describe the prevalence of GERD symptoms and to assess symptom response to intervention. Based on the current review, the use of RDQ appears best suited for comparing diagnostic or treatment cohorts in which symptoms are evaluated. Interpretation of RDQ findings outside of a study-specific context is limited without accepted scoring standards.","PeriodicalId":73049,"journal":{"name":"Foregut (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foregut (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26345161231198622","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The RDQ was developed to assist in diagnosing GERD, but is now widely used in multiple contexts and validated in several languages. However, there is no standard RDQ scoring rubric, making comparisons between its uses challenging. Therefore, we performed a scoping review to explore the current applications and scoring cutoffs of the RDQ. The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science electronic databases were systematically searched from January 2001 to January 2021 by a medical librarian using controlled vocabulary terms and keywords to identify experimental and observational study designs. The search strategy yielded 5707 studies and 116 met inclusion criteria yielding a total patient population of 115 064. Studies utilized the RDQ to establish a GERD diagnosis (n = 52, 45%), report the prevalence of GERD symptoms within a specific population (n = 21, 18%), and assess the effect of an intervention on symptoms (n = 43, 37%). There was variability between the scoring threshold used for diagnosing GERD, with total GERD domain score ≥12 being the most commonly used (n = 16, 14%). The RDQ was designed as an aid for diagnosing GERD, but scoring methods and thresholds vary and the RDQ now is used to describe the prevalence of GERD symptoms and to assess symptom response to intervention. Based on the current review, the use of RDQ appears best suited for comparing diagnostic or treatment cohorts in which symptoms are evaluated. Interpretation of RDQ findings outside of a study-specific context is limited without accepted scoring standards.