The GoodHope Ehlers Danlos Syndrome Clinic: development and implementation of the first interdisciplinary program for multi-system issues in connective tissue disorders at the Toronto General Hospital.

Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) are a heterogeneous group of genetic connective tissue disorders, and typically manifests as weak joints that subluxate/dislocate, stretchy and/or fragile skin, organ/systems dysfunction, and significant widespread pain. Historically, this syndrome has been poorly understood and often overlooked. As a result, people living with EDS had difficulty obtaining an accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment, leading to untold personal suffering as well as ineffective health care utilization. The GoodHope EDS clinic addresses systemic gaps in the diagnosis and treatment of EDS. This paper describes a leap forward-from lack of awareness, diagnosis, and treatment-to expert care that is tailored to meet the specific needs of patients with EDS. The GoodHope EDS clinic consists of experts from various medical specialties who work together to provide comprehensive care that addresses the multi-systemic nature of the syndrome. In addition, EDS-specific self-management programs have been developed that draw on exercise science, rehabilitation, and health psychology to improve physical and psychosocial wellbeing and overall quality of life. Embedded into the program are research initiatives to shed light on the clinical presentation, underlying mechanisms of pathophysiology, and syndrome management. We also lead regular educational activities for community health care providers to increase awareness and competence in the interprofessional management of EDS beyond our doors and throughout the province and country.

Utilization of the 2017 diagnostic criteria for hEDS by the Toronto GoodHope Ehlers-Danlos syndrome clinic: A retrospective review.

The new 2017 diagnostic criteria for hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (hEDS) provide a framework for diagnosing hEDS but are more stringent than the previous Villefranche criteria. Our clinical experience at the GoodHope EDS clinic was that the 2017 criteria left many highly symptomatic patients without a diagnosis of hEDS. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to confirm our clinic experience and assess the accuracy of the 2017 diagnostic criteria for hEDS in patients who had a previous hEDS diagnosis based on the Villefranche criteria. Our study found that 15% (n = 20 of 131) of patients with a prior diagnosis of hEDS met the 2017 diagnostic criteria, and many of the traits used to distinguish hEDS were not significantly more frequent in patients who met 2017 criteria versus those who did not. In both groups objective systemic manifestations were found less frequently than subjective systemic manifestations. Beighton score (BS) as assessed by primary care practitioner was found to be higher than assessment by EDS practitioner in 81% (n = 74 of 91) of cases. Generalized joint hypermobility was confirmed in only 46% (n = 51 of 111) of patients who had a previous diagnosis of hEDS. Higher BS did not correlate with increased number of systemic manifestations in our cohort. Common comorbidities of hEDS were found with similar frequency in those who met 2017 criteria and those who did not. Based on our cohort, the 2017 hEDS diagnostic criteria require refinement to improve its diagnostic accuracy.

Treatment Algorithm for Chronic Idiopathic Constipation and Constipation-Predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome Derived from a Canadian National Survey and Needs Assessment on Choices of Therapeutic Agents.

Background. Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) and constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C) are common functional lower gastrointestinal disorders that impair patients' quality of life. In a national survey, we aimed to evaluate (1) Canadian physician practice patterns in the utilization of therapeutic agents listed in the new ACG and AGA guidelines; (2) physicians satisfaction with these agents for their CIC and IBS-C patients; and (3) the usefulness of these new guidelines in their clinical practice. Methods. A 9-item questionnaire was sent to 350 Canadian specialists to evaluate their clinical practice for the management of CIC and IBS-C. Results. The response rate to the survey was 16% (n = 55). Almost all (96%) respondents followed a standard, stepwise approach for management while they believed that only 24% of referring physicians followed the same approach. Respondents found guanylyl cyclase C (GCC) agonist most satisfying when treating their patients. Among the 69% of respondents who were aware of published guidelines, only 50% found them helpful in prioritizing treatment choices and 69% of respondents indicated that a treatment algorithm, applicable to Canadian practice, would be valuable. Conclusion. Based on this needs assessment, a treatment algorithm was developed to provide clinical guidance in the management of IBS-C and CIC in Canada.