Improvement of quality of care provided to outpatients with hepatic cirrhosis after an educational intervention.

OBJECTIVE: A set of indicators has been reported to measure the quality of care for cirrhotic patients, and previously published studies report variable adherence rates to these indicators. This study aimed to assess the quality of care provided to cirrhotic outpatients before and after an educational intervention by determining its impact on adherence to quality indicators. METHODS: We conducted a quasi-experimental, cross-sectional study including 324 cirrhotic patients seen in 2017 and 2019 at a tertiary teaching hospital in Spain. Quality indicators were assessed in five domains: documentation of cirrhosis etiology, disease severity assessment, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening, variceal bleeding prophylaxis, and vaccination. After identifying areas for improvement, an educational intervention was implemented. A second evaluation was performed after the intervention to assess changes in adherence rates. RESULTS: Before the intervention, adherence rates were excellent (>90%) for indicators related to variceal bleeding prophylaxis and documentation of cirrhosis etiology, acceptable (60-80%) for HCC screening and disease severity assessment, and poor (<50%) for vaccinations. After the educational intervention, there was a statistically significant improvement in adherence rates for eight indicators related to HCC screening (70-90%), disease severity assessment (90%), variceal bleeding prophylaxis (>90%), and vaccinations (60-90%). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates a significant improvement in the quality of care provided to cirrhotic outpatients after an educational intervention. The findings highlight the importance of targeted educational interventions to enhance adherence to quality indicators in the management of cirrhosis.

Impact of Biological Agents on Postsurgical Complications in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Multicentre Study of Geteccu.

BACKGROUND: The impact of biologics on the risk of postoperative complications (PC) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is still an ongoing debate. This lack of evidence is more relevant for ustekinumab and vedolizumab. AIMS: To evaluate the impact of biologics on the risk of PC. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed in 37 centres. Patients treated with biologics within 12 weeks before surgery were considered "exposed". The impact of the exposure on the risk of 30-day PC and the risk of infections was assessed by logistic regression and propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1535 surgeries were performed on 1370 patients. Of them, 711 surgeries were conducted in the exposed cohort (584 anti-TNF, 58 vedolizumab and 69 ustekinumab). In the multivariate analysis, male gender (OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.2-2.0), urgent surgery (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.2-2.2), laparotomy approach (OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.1-1.9) and severe anaemia (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.3-2.6) had higher risk of PC, while academic hospitals had significantly lower risk. Exposure to biologics (either anti-TNF, vedolizumab or ustekinumab) did not increase the risk of PC (OR: 1.2; 95% CI: 0.97-1.58), although it could be a risk factor for postoperative infections (OR 1.5; 95% CI: 1.03-2.27). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative administration of biologics does not seem to be a risk factor for overall PC, although it may be so for postoperative infections.

Ustekinumab treatment for toxic megacolon in severe colonic Crohn's disease.

Toxic megacolon is most commonly considered as a complication of inflammatory bowel disease, especially ulcerative colitis and colonic Crohn's disease to a lesser extent. It appears in the context of moderate-to-severe disease and often requires colectomy. Currently, after an inadequate response to conventional therapy with systemic corticosteroids, the use of cyclosporine or infliximab is considered as an alternative option, prior to surgical intervention. We present a case report of toxic megacolon in a patient with a severe refractory colonic Crohn's disease, where anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies were contraindicated. Consequently, we decided to use ustekinumab as a rescue therapy, despite insufficient evidence to provide recommendations for this indication.