Attitudes and expectations of patients on home parenteral nutrition towards eHealth: A multicenter survey.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Advances in technology enable patients on home parenteral nutrition (HPN) to manage their treatment more independently and safely. eHealth is a promising application of electronic means in healthcare, aimed at improving and simplifying processes and connecting the different parties involved. A thorough understanding of the attitudes and expectations of patients on HPN towards eHealth is a prerequisite for a successful implementation. However, to the best of our knowledge, such a survey preceding the implementation of HPN specific eHealth care has never been conducted. The objective of this preliminary survey is the acquisition of insights on the attitudes and expectations of patients on HPN towards eHealth. Resulting findings then serve as the basis for the design of an eHealth platform to facilitate communication among those involved in HPN care, improve the HPN management, and safeguard and monitor the treatment. METHODS: We conducted a survey on the attitudes and expectations of patients towards an envisioned eHealth platform for HPN. Patients were recruited from large Swiss hospitals by their treating physician or directly by the research team. The surveys were conducted between September 2020 and October 2021 by structured personal interviews based on a questionnaire. RESULTS: We included 35 patients on HPN (21 [60%] females) treated in ambulant care of 4 hospitals. They had a median (interquartile range) age of 55 (18) years and a median (interquartile range) duration of parenteral nutrition of 1.3 (3.1) years. Most patients (n = 30, 86%) were equipped with a smartphone, tablet, or computer and 22 (63%) used apps and rated themselves as proficient with the corresponding digital device. A majority of patients rated the following aspects and features of the platform as important: Data collection and storage (n = 29, 83%), checklists for PN, catheter, and infusion pump handling (n = 28, 80%), video instructions (n = 27, 77%), and videoconferencing with physicians (n = 25, 71%). Most patients (n = 26, 74%) were willing to enter data into the platform themselves. The type of data to be entered should be defined on an individual basis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on HPN are open to videoconference consultations and using an eHealth platform. Two-thirds have the necessary technical skills including suitable digital devices for an eHealth care. We identified key features of an eHealth platform to improve HPN management.

Treatment efficacy of a low FODMAP diet compared to a low lactose diet in IBS patients: A randomized, cross-over designed study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A low FODMAP diet (LFD) has become a standard treatment in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients. Compliant adherence to a LFD is challenging. We investigated the effect of a LFD compared to a less restrictive low lactose diet (LLD) in a randomized cross-over trial with IBS patients. METHODS: Twenty-nine IBS patients were randomly assigned to two groups. After a run-in phase of 14 days, patients received 21 days of either a LFD or LLD. This intervention was followed by a washout period of 21 days before crossing over to the alternate diet. Dietician led diet instruction was given continuously. An IBS Severity Scoring System (IBS-SSS) was filled in at the end of each study period. To enhance study adherence, daily symptoms were assessed using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). RESULTS: IBS patients, irrespective of lactase deficiency, had a significantly reduced IBS-SSS score after both diets (LFD p = 0.002, LLD p = 0.007) without significant difference. On both diets, patients reported that IBS had less impact on their daily life compared to the time before the study (p < 0.01). On daily assessment, IBS patients on LFD reported significantly less abdominal pain (median VAS difference to baseline -0.8 (-2.8 to 2.7, p = 0.03) and less bloating (-0.5 (-4.1 to 3.4, p = 0.02) than patients on the LLD. CONCLUSION: Both diets improved the overall IBS severity significantly and patients' preference of the two diets was similar. LFD but not LLD effectively reduced pain and bloating in patients with IBS.

Effect of morbid obesity, gastric banding and gastric bypass on esophageal symptoms, mucosa and function.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are commonly associated diseases. Bariatric surgery has been shown to have various impacts on esophageal function and GERD. Our aim was to evaluate changes in symptoms, endoscopic findings, bolus passage and esophageal function in patients after primary gastric bypass surgery as compared to patients converted from gastric banding to gastric bypass. METHODS: Obese patients scheduled for laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (naïve-to-bypass) and patients who previously underwent gastric banding and were considered for conversion from gastric banding to gastric bypass (band-to-bypass) were included. Patients rated esophageal and epigastric symptoms (100 point VAS) and underwent upper endoscopy, impedance-manometry, and modified "timed barium swallow" before/after surgery. RESULTS: Data from 66 naïve-to-bypass patients (51/66, 77 % females, mean age 41.2 ± 11.1 years) and 68 band-to-bypass patients (53/68, 78 % females, mean age 43.8 ± 10.0 years) were available for analysis. Esophageal symptoms, esophagitis, esophageal motility abnormalities and impaired esophageal bolus transit were more common in patients that underwent gastric banding compared to those that underwent gastric bypass. The majority of symptoms, lesions and abnormalities induced by gastric banding were decreased by conversion to gastric bypass. Esophagitis was present in 28/68 (41 %) and 13/47 (28 %) patients in the band-to-bypass group, pre- versus postoperatively, respectively, (p < 0.05). The percentage of swallows with normal bolus transit increased following transformation from gastric band to gastric bypass (57.9 ± 4.1 and 83.6 ± 3.4 %, respectively, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: From an esophageal perspective, gastric bypass surgery induces less motility disorders and esophageal symptoms and should be therefore favored over gastric banding in difficult to treat obese patients at risk of repeated bariatric surgery.

Correlation of esophageal clearance and dysphagia symptom assessment after treatment for achalasia.

BACKGROUND: Early relapse after treatment of achalasia occurs in 10-32 % of patients. The best method to follow up these patients is not known. Symptoms often do not correlate with esophageal clearance: some patients are oligosymptomatic despite persistent esophageal stasis/dilatation. AIM: The aim was to compare two methods of measurement of esophageal clearance (impedance manometry with barium swallow) in achalasia patients following treatment. Symptom assessment (Eckardt score/detailed dysphagia questions) was correlated with objective measurements of esophageal stasis (barium swallow and impedance manometry) in achalasia patients following treatment. METHODS: Post-treatment patients were followed up after median 38.4 months (median range 1-144 months). Symptoms were quantified using the Eckardt score and detailed dysphagia questions. Timed barium swallow quantified distal esophageal retention 0.5, 1, 3, and 5 minutes after oral contrast and impedance manometry assessed total and segmental esophageal clearance during water/viscous swallows and free drinking (200 mL). RESULTS: Thirty-two patients (7 women, age 48.3; range 20-74) completed all investigations. Bolus retention in the distal esophagus assessed by impedance correlated well with barium swallow. There were no differences in impedance and timed barium swallow parameters between patients with Eckardt score 0-2 points or ≥3 points. Nine (28%) patients had an Eckardt score ≥3 points and 21 (66%) had ≥1 point in the detailed dysphagia questions. Patients without any dysphagia history had lower barium column height and width at 3 and 5 minutes compared to those with ≥1 positive answer in the detailed dysphagia questions. Correlation between the Eckardt score and detailed dysphagia questions was moderately good (r = 0.546; p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: A detailed history of esophageal dysphagia rather than the Eckardt score is more sensitive to detect oligosymptomatic patients with disturbed esophageal clearance. Impedance manometry correlates well with the timed-barium swallow examination and represents an alternative objective assessment as it avoids radiation exposure.

The contribution of intrabolus pressure to symptoms induced by gastric banding.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Mechanisms that ultimately lead to dysphagia are still not totally clear. Patients with laparoscopic gastric banding (LAGB) often complain about dysphagia, regurgitation and heartburn. Our aim was to evaluate the contribution of intrabolus pressure to symptoms of gastric banding. METHODS: This study investigated 30 patients with LAGB before and 3 months after conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), evaluating symptoms with a 7-point-Likert-scale and esophageal peristalsis, esophageal bolus transit and intrabolus pressure changes using combined impedance-manometry. RESULTS: Conversion from LAGB to RYGB leads to a significant reduction in dysphagia (1.9 +/- 0.4 vs. 0.0 +/- 0.0; p< 0.01) and regurgitation (4.2 +/- 0.4 vs. 0.1 +/- 0.1; p< 0.01) symptom scores. For liquid swallows we found a modest but significant correlation between the intensity of dysphagia and intrabolus pressure (r=0.11; p<0.05) and the intensity of regurgitation and intrabolus pressure for viscous swallows (r=0.12, p<0.05) in patients with LAGB. There was a significant (p< 0.05) reduction in intrabolus pressure at 5 cm above LES before (liquid 10.6 +/-1.0; viscous 13.5 +/- 1.5) and after (liquid 6.4 +/- 0.6; viscous 10.5 +/- 0.9) conversion from LAGB to RYGB. CONCLUSION: Current data suggest that intraesophageal pressure during bolus presence in the distal esophagus contributes to the development but not to the intensity of dysphagia and regurgitation.