A Multidimensional Approach to Social Support: the Questionnaire on the Frequency of and Satisfaction with Social Support (QFSSS)

The Questionnaire on the Frequency of and Satisfaction with Social Support (QFSSS) was designed to assess the frequency of and the degree of satisfaction with perceived social support received from different sources in relation to three types of support: emotional, informational, and instrumental. This study tested the reliability of the questionnaire scores and its criterion and structural validity. The data were drawn from survey interviews of 2042 Spanish people. The results show high internal consistency (values of Cronbach's alpha ranged from .763 to .952). The correlational analysis showed significant positive associations between QFSSS scores and measures of subjective well-being and perceived social support, as well as significant negative associations with measures of loneliness (values of Pearson's r correlation ranged from .11 to .97). Confirmatory factor analysis using structural equation modelling verified an internal 4-factor structure that corresponds to the sources of support analysed: partner, family, friends, and community (values ranged from .93 to .95 for the Goodness of Fit Index (GFI); from .95 to .98 for the Comparative Fit Index (CFI); and from .10 to .07 for the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA)). These results confirm the validity of the QFSSS as a versatile tool which is suitable for the multidimensional assessment of social support.

Management of the clinical issue of constipation with abdominal complaints in adults: a national survey of Primary Care physicians and gastroenterologists

Irritable bowel syndrome and functional constipation represent a relevant and common health issue. However, real-world clinical practice includes patients with constipation who may or may not have other abdominal complaints (pain, bloating, abdominal discomfort) with variable frequency. The goal of the present study was to obtain information on the workload entailed by patients with constipation and associated abdominal complaints, predominant clinical behaviors, education needs, and potential daily practice aids both in Primary Care and gastroenterology settings. The clinical behavior of doctors is generally similar at both levels, despite differences in healthcare approach: use of empiric therapies and clinically guided diagnostic tests, with some differences in colonoscopy use (not always directly accessible from Primary Care). Regarding perceptions, general support and osmotic laxatives are most valued by PC doctors, whereas osmotic laxatives, combined laxatives, and linaclotide are most valued by GE specialists. Furthermore, over half of respondents considered differentiating both diagnoses as challenging. Finally, considerable education needs are self-acknowledged at both levels, as is a demand for guidelines and protocols to help in managing this issue in clinical practice. A strength of this study is its providing a joint photograph of the medical approach and the perceptions of constipation with abdominal discomfort from a medical standpoint. Weaknesses include self-declaration (no formal validation) and a response rate potentially biased by professional motivation.