RESUMO
In response to the social inequities that exist in health care, the NIH-funded Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers (CEGIR) recently formed a diversity committee to examine systemic racism and implicit bias in the care and research of eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs). Herein, we describe our process, highlighting milestones and issues addressed since the committee's inception, which we hope will inspire other researchers to enhance diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) in their fields. Our journey began by establishing mission and vision statements to define the purpose of the committee. Regular discussion of diversity-related topics was incorporated into existing meetings and web-based materials were shared. This was followed by educational initiatives, including establishing a library of relevant publications and a speaker series to address DEIA topics. We then established a research agenda focused on the following actionable items: (1) to define what is known about the demographics of EGIDs by systematic review of population-based studies; (2) to develop a practical tool for reporting participant demographics to reduce bias in EGID literature; (3) to examine health disparities in the care of individuals with eosinophilic esophagitis who present to the emergency department with an esophageal food impaction; (4) to examine how access to a gastroenterologist affects the conclusions of published research examining the prevalence of pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis; and (5) to develop a model for examining the dimensions of diversity, and provide a framework for CEGIR's ongoing projects and data capture. In addition to promoting consciousness of DEIA, this initiative has fostered inclusivity among CEGIR members and will continue to inspire positive changes in EGID care and research.
Diversity in Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Research To address systemic bias in patient care and research in eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases, the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers (CEGIR) recently formed a diversity committee. The CEGIR diversity committee has defined its purpose through mission and vision statements and developed structured educational and research initiatives to enhance diversity, equity, inclusivity, and accessibility (DEIA) in all CEGIR activities. Here, we share the process of formation of our diversity committee, highlighting milestones achieved and summarizing future directions. We hope that this report will serve as a guide and an inspiration for other researchers to enhance DEIA in their fields.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Little is known about patient choice in treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). AIM: Determine motivators and barriers to using common EoE therapies and describe patient-reported shared decision making (SDM) and satisfaction with treatment. METHODS: We developed and administered a Web-based survey on factors influencing EoE treatment choice, SDM, and satisfaction. Adults with EoE and adult caregivers of pediatric EoE patients were recruited via patient advocacy groups and at two centers. Descriptive statistics of multiple response questions and multivariable logistic regression were performed to identify predictors of SDM and satisfaction with treatment. RESULTS: A total of 243 adults (mean age 38.7 years) and 270 adult caregivers of children (mean age 9.5 years) completed the survey. Preventing worsening disease was the most common motivator to treat EoE. Barriers to topical steroids were potential side effects, cost, and preferring a medication-free approach. Inconvenience and quality of life were barriers to diet. Potential adverse events, discomfort, and cost were barriers to dilation. Nearly half (42%) of patients experienced low SDM, but those followed by gastroenterologists were more likely to experience greater SDM compared to non-specialists (OR 1.81; 95% CI 1.03-3.15). Patients receiving more SDM were more satisfied with treatment, regardless of provider or treatment type (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.76-3.92). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with EoE pursue treatment mostly to prevent worsening disease. Common barriers to treatment are inconvenience and financial costs. SDM is practiced most by gastroenterologists, but nearly half of patients do not experience SDM, indicating a substantial area of need in EoE.
Assuntos
Tomada de Decisão Compartilhada , Esofagite Eosinofílica/psicologia , Esofagite Eosinofílica/terapia , Gastroenterologistas/psicologia , Motivação , Participação do Paciente/psicologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Participação do Paciente/métodos , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto JovemRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Clinical features of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have been well-described in the literature, however, characterization of features experienced by patients with other eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) is lacking. Using data collected from a patient contact registry, we sought to characterize and contrast patient-reported gastrointestinal and extragastrointestinal symptoms and comorbidities in non-EoE EGIDs, including eosinophilic gastritis, gastroenteritis and colitis, relative to EoE. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of contact registry data collected from 2015 to 2018. Statistical comparisons were made using chi-square (categorical measures) and the Mann-Whitney U test (continuous measures). Multivariable analyses were used to evaluate associations between treatment and feelings of isolation. RESULTS: Of the 715 reporting an EGID diagnosis (nâ=â525 EoE; nâ=â190 non-EoE EGID), a higher proportion of those with a non-EoE EGID reported more frequent specific and nonspecific gastrointestinal symptoms, including nausea, abdominal pain, diarrhea, constipation, and bloating (Pâ<â0.01 for all). Participants with a non-EoE EGID were more likely to report higher frequency of fatigue, isolation, and deep muscle or joint pain (Pâ<â0.01 for all). Specific food elimination and elemental formula treatments were associated with increased odds of more frequent (at least weekly) feelings of isolation for participants with EoE (adjusted odds rtaio [aOR]: 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5--4.1 for specific food elimination and adjusted OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2--3.3 for elemental formula). CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences exist in the symptoms and comorbidities experienced between those with EoE versus non-EoE EGIDs. Additional investigation is needed to elucidate the factors that may contribute to the high disease burden of these poorly understood conditions.
Assuntos
Enterite , Esofagite Eosinofílica , Efeitos Psicossociais da Doença , Estudos Transversais , Enterite/diagnóstico , Enterite/epidemiologia , Eosinofilia , Esofagite Eosinofílica/diagnóstico , Esofagite Eosinofílica/epidemiologia , Gastrite , Humanos , Sistema de RegistrosRESUMO
Eosinophil-associated diseases (EADs) are rare, heterogeneous disorders characterized by the presence of eosinophils in tissues and/or peripheral blood resulting in immunopathology. The heterogeneity of tissue involvement, lack of sufficient animal models, technical challenges in working with eosinophils, and lack of standardized histopathologic approaches have hampered progress in basic research. Additionally, clinical trials and drug development for rare EADs are limited by the lack of primary and surrogate endpoints, biomarkers, and validated patient-reported outcomes. Researchers with expertise in eosinophil biology and eosinophil-related diseases reviewed the state of current eosinophil research, resources, progress, and unmet needs in the field since the 2012 meeting of the NIH Taskforce on the Research of Eosinophil-Associated Diseases (TREAD). RE-TREAD focused on gaps in basic science, translational, and clinical research on eosinophils and eosinophil-related pathogenesis. Improved recapitulation of human eosinophil biology and pathogenesis in murine models was felt to be of importance. Characterization of eosinophil phenotypes, the role of eosinophil subsets in tissues, identification of biomarkers of eosinophil activation and tissue load, and a better understanding of the role of eosinophils in human disease were prioritized. Finally, an unmet need for tools for use in clinical trials was emphasized. Histopathologic scoring, patient- and clinician-reported outcomes, and appropriate coding were deemed of paramount importance for research collaborations, drug development, and approval by regulatory agencies. Further exploration of the eosinophil genome, epigenome, and proteome was also encouraged. Although progress has been made since 2012, unmet needs in eosinophil research remain a priority.
Assuntos
Comitês Consultivos , Eosinofilia , Eosinófilos , Necessidades e Demandas de Serviços de Saúde , Doenças Raras , Animais , Humanos , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Estados UnidosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) are a rare but emerging healthcare problem. Patient advocacy groups (PAGs) have an important role in representing the EGID community, and serve as valuable research partners. By leveraging the partnership between medical researchers and PAGs, we examined the unmet needs and barriers to care perceived by individuals affected by EGIDs. Next, we examined if these varied between adult EGID patients and adult caregivers of children with EGID. METHODS: Adult EGID patients and adult caregivers of children (<18 years) with EGIDs participated in this study. PAGs conducted focus groups comprised of individuals affected by EGIDs to identify domains and questions meaningful to the EGID community and this information was used to develop an online REDCap survey. The survey consisted of 58 questions across medical, healthcare, social, and emotional impact domains. It was distributed via the PAGs' web-based platforms. Demographic data, and responses to questions on a six-point Likert scale were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 361 responses analyzed, 90 (25%) were from adult EGID patients and 271 (75%) were from adult caregivers. Of the applicable responses, in the medical domain only 19% of participants indicated that repeated endoscopies to monitor response to treatment was convenient. In the healthcare domain, 67% indicated that lack of insurance coverage for elemental formula was a barrier. In the social domain, only 5% of respondents reported adequate awareness of EGIDs in schools. In the emotional domain, 64% had experienced significant stress due to EGID related out-of-pocket costs. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that some of these responses varied between adult EGID patients and adult caregivers of children with EGID. The respondents indicated highest priority for improvement in the medical domain compared to other domains. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals affected by EGIDs have a constellation of complex unmet needs and perceived barriers across medical, healthcare, social and emotional domains. Addressing unmet needs in the medical domain is relatively more important for the EGID community. Understanding unmet needs and barriers will likely help design improved patient-centered EGID care paradigms.