Observational analysis reveals a higher prevalence of avoidant/restrictive eating in individuals with bowel symptoms, highlighting associated clinical factors.
Introduction: We aimed to investigate the prevalence of avoidant/restrictive eating in individuals with versus without bowel symptoms in the general population, and identify factors associated with avoidant/restrictive eating. Methods: In this Swedish population-based internet health survey, we included individuals with at least one bowel symptom used to diagnose a functional bowel disorder according to the Rome IV criteria, and an age- and sex-matched control group without bowel symptoms. Cutoffs for the Nine-Item avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder screen (NIAS) was used to determine the prevalence of avoidant/restrictive eating. Demographics and clinical characteristics were assessed using validated questionnaires, and independent factors associated with avoidant/restrictive eating were determined by hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Results: Avoidant/restrictive eating was more common in individuals with bowel symptoms (n=825) compared to controls (n=1806) (22.8% vs 18.2%, p<.001). Individuals with bowel symptoms with avoidant/restrictive eating were more often female, had lower body mass index, more likely to report overlapping functional dyspepsia, reported more severe bowel, psychological and somatic symptoms, shape/weight concerns, and a lower quality of life. Bowel symptom severity emerged as the strongest factor explaining the variability of avoidant/restrictive eating severity. Discussion: Avoidant/restrictive eating is common in individuals with bowel symptoms and associated with a more severe clinical profile, indicating a need to discuss eating behavior with patients. However, avoidant/restrictive eating is also common in individuals in the general population without bowel symptoms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Blomsten et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: