Self-medication with analgesics reported by patients with ulcerative colitis: An anonymous survey.

INTRODUCTION: Analgesics are widely used, but evidence regarding whether their use increases the risk of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) flares or complications is unclear. Therefore, self-medication with analgesics in IBD is usually not recommended. The aim of this study was to explore the prevalence of self-medication with analgesics in a cohort of ulcerative colitis (UC) patients and to identify reasons and factors associated with self-medication. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included consecutive unselected adult patients with UC. Participants were asked to complete an anonymous web-based survey with multiple-choice questions and closed responses. No clinical data were collected. RESULTS: A total of 546 patients (61.2% women, mean age 39.9 years) completed the survey. The prevalence of self-medication with analgesics was 49.8% (272/546). Paracetamol (45.2%) and metamizole (21.2%) were the most frequently used drugs; frequencies of self-medication were <5% for other analgesics (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids). The most frequent reasons for self-medication were the need for quick symptom relief and that it had been agreed with/prescribed by the treating physician. Multivariable analysis identified female sex (odds ratio [OR]=1.9), sick leave (OR=2.2), treatment with intravenous drugs (OR=2.9), and emergency room visit (OR=2.3) as variables associated with self-medication, whilst follow-up by a nurse was associated with less self-medication (OR=0.6). CONCLUSION: The frequency of self-medication with analgesics in UC patients is high and appears to be associated with variables suggesting worse disease control. Closer follow-up, including a specialized nurse, could decrease self-medication. Strategies to improve disease control, including close monitoring of symptoms such as pain, are needed.

Patient involvement in reflective multicriteria decision analysis to assist decision making in oncology.

OBJECTIVES: Patient involvement in drug evaluation decision making is increasing. The aim of the current study was to develop a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework that would enable the inclusion of the patient perspective in the selection of appropriate criteria for MCDAs being used in the value assessments of oncologic drugs. METHODS: A literature review was conducted to identify and define criteria used in drug assessments from patient perspectives. The Evidence and Value: Impact on Decision Making methodology was used to develop a MCDA framework. Identified criteria were discussed by a sample of oncology patient association representatives who decided which criteria were important from patient perspectives. Selected criteria were rated by importance. The preliminary MCDA framework was tested through the assessment of a hypothetical oncology treatment. A discussion was carried out to agree on a final pilot MCDA framework. RESULTS: Twenty-two criteria were extracted from the literature review. After criteria discussion, sixteen criteria remained. The most important criteria were comparative patient reported outcomes (PRO), comparative efficacy and disease severity. After the discussion generated by the scoring of the hypothetical oncology treatment, the final pilot MCDA framework included seven quantitative criteria ("disease severity", "unmet needs", "comparative efficacy / effectiveness", "comparative safety / tolerability", "comparative PROs", "contribution of oncological innovation") and one contextual criterion ("population priorities and access"). CONCLUSIONS: The present study developed a pilot reflective MCDA framework that could increase patient's capability to participate in the decision-making process by providing systematic drug assessments from the patient perspective.

Patient preferences for inflammatory bowel disease treatments: protocol development of a global preference survey using a discrete choice experiment.

Background: As the therapeutic landscape for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) continues to expand, a need exists to understand how patients perceive and value different attributes associated with their disease as well as with current and emerging treatments. These insights can inform the development and regulation of effective interventions for IBD, benefiting various stakeholders including healthcare professionals, drug developers, regulators, Health Technology Assessment bodies, payers, and ultimately patients suffering from IBD. In response to this, the present patient preference study was developed with the aim to (1) determine the relative preference weights for IBD treatment and disease related attributes, and (2) explain how preferences may differ across patients with different characteristics (preference heterogeneity). Methods: The patient preference study (PPS) was developed through an 8-step process, with each step being informed by an advisory board. This process included: (1) stated preference method selection, (2) attribute and level development (including a scoping literature review, focus group discussions, and advisory board meetings), (3) choice task construction, (4) sample size estimation, (5) survey implementation, (6) piloting, (7) translation, and (8) pre-testing. The resulting discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey comprises 14 attributes with between two and five varying levels. Participants will answer 15 DCE questions with a partial profile design, where each of the choice questions encompasses two hypothetical treatment profiles showing four attributes. Additionally, questions about patients' socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as contextual factors are implemented. The survey is available in 15 different languages and aims to minimally recruit 700 patients globally. Discussion: This protocol gives valuable insights toward preference researchers and decision-makers on how PPS design can be transparently reported, demonstrating solutions to remaining gaps in preference research. Results of the PPS will provide evidence regarding the disease and treatment related characteristics that are most important for IBD patients, and how these may differ across patients with different characteristics. These findings will yield valuable insights applicable to preference research, drug development, regulatory approval, and reimbursement processes, enabling decision making across the medicinal product life cycle that is aligned with the true needs of IBD patients.

Baseline Data and Measurement Instruments Reported in Observational Studies in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Results from a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneity in demographic and outcomes data with corresponding measurement instruments [MIs] creates barriers to data pooling and analysis. Several core outcome sets have been developed in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] to homogenize outcomes data. A parallel Minimum Data Set [MDS] for baseline characteristics is lacking. We conducted a systematic review to develop the first MDS. METHODS: A systematic review was made of observational studies from three databases [2000-2021]. Titles and abstracts were screened, full-text articles were reviewed, and data were extracted by two reviewers. Baseline data were grouped into ten domains: demographics, clinical features, disease behaviour/complications, biomarkers, endoscopy, histology, radiology, healthcare utilization and patient-reported data. Frequency of baseline data and MIs within respective domains are reported. RESULTS: From 315 included studies [600 552 subjects], most originated from Europe [196; 62%] and North America [59; 19%], and were published between 2011 and 2021 [251; 80%]. The most frequent domains were demographics [311; 98.7%] and clinical [289; 91.7%]; 224 [71.1%] studies reported on the triad of sex [306; 97.1%], age [289; 91.7%], and disease phenotype [231; 73.3%]. Few included baseline data for radiology [19; 6%], healthcare utilization [19; 6%], and histology [17; 5.4%]. Ethnicity [19; 6%], race [17; 5.4%], and alcohol/drug consumption [6; 1.9%] were the least reported demographics. From 25 MIs for clinical disease activity, the Harvey-Bradshaw Index [n = 53] and Mayo score [n = 37] were most frequently used. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variability exists in baseline population data reporting. These findings will inform a future consensus for MDS in IBD to enhance data harmonization and credibility of real-world evidence.

Patients' perception of using telehealth for consultation: insights after pandemic and development of an online calculator platform to predict acceptance of remote consultation: the TELEMED international study.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a change in healthcare models. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient acceptance of telehealth as an alternative to physical consultations, and to identify factors predicting higher satisfaction. This was an observational, cross-sectional, multi-center, international study. All consecutive patients for whom telehealth was used in consultations between April and July 2020 were considered for inclusion. The validated Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) was used as a model to measure patient acceptance. Overall, 747 patients were observed, of whom 721 agreed to participate (96·5%). The TUQ showed that 86·9% of patients agreed that telehealth was useful; 85·2% supported the interface quality and 81·4% endorsed the interaction quality. Patients aged > 60 y were less likely to agree with the use of telehealth (p < 0·05). A web-based prediction tool was generated to calculate global satisfaction and to identify patients more likely to feel comfortable with telehealth. Telehealth is feasible and allows consultations that are satisfactory for patients. Technological advancements could ease safe implementation of telehealth into everyday practice. Adequate patient selection can be useful to ensure that the ideal strategy is used for each individual during and after the pandemic.

What are the Unmet Needs and Most Relevant Treatment Outcomes According to Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease? A Qualitative Patient Preference Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: As more therapeutic options with their own characteristics become available for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD], drug development and individual treatment decision-making needs to be tailored towards patients' preferences and needs. This study aimed to understand patient preferences among IBD patients, and their most important treatment outcomes and unmet needs. METHODS: This qualitative study consisted of [1] a scoping literature review, [2] two focus group discussions [FGDs] with IBD patients [n = 11] using the nominal group technique, and [3] two expert panel discussions. RESULTS: IBD patients discussed a multitude of unmet needs regarding their symptoms, side-effects, and psychological and social issues for which they would welcome improved outcomes. In particular, IBD patients elaborated on the uncertainties and fears they experienced regarding the possible need for surgery or an ostomy, the effectiveness and onset of action of their medication, and the medication's long-term effects. Furthermore, participants extensively discussed the mental impact of IBD and their need for more psychological guidance, support, and improved information and communication with healthcare workers regarding their disease and emotional wellbeing. The following five characteristics were identified during the attribute grading as most important: prevent surgery, long-term clinical remission, improved quality of life [QoL], occurrence of urgency and improved labour rate. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that IBD drug development and treatment decision-making are needed to improve IBD symptoms and adverse events that significantly impact IBD patients' QoL. Furthermore, this study underlines patients' need for a shared decision-making process in which their desired treatment outcomes and uncertainties are explicitly discussed and considered.

Development of a Core Outcome Set for Real-world Data in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] Position Paper.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The utility of real-world data is dependent on the quality and homogeneity of reporting. We aimed to develop a core outcome set for real-world studies in adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. METHODS: Candidate outcomes and outcome measures were identified and categorised in a systematic review. An international panel including patients, dietitians, epidemiologists, gastroenterologists, nurses, pathologists, radiologists, and surgeons participated in a modified Delphi consensus process. A consensus meeting was held to ratify the final core outcome set. RESULTS: A total of 26 panellists from 13 countries participated in the consensus process. A total of 271 items [130 outcomes, 141 outcome measures] in nine study domains were included in the first-round survey. Panellists agreed that real-world studies on disease activity should report clinical, endoscopic, and biomarker disease activity. A disease-specific clinical index [Harvey-Bradshaw Index, Partial Mayo Score, Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index] should be used, rather than physician global assessment. In ulcerative colitis [UC], either the UC Endoscopic Index of Severity or the Mayo Endoscopic Score can be used, but there was no consensus on an endoscopic index for Crohn's disease, nor was there consensus on the use of the presence of ulcers. There was consensus on using faecal calprotectin and C-reactive protein. There was no consensus on the use of histology in real-world studies. CONCLUSIONS: A core outcome set for real-world studies in IBD has been developed based on international multidisciplinary consensus. Its adoption will facilitate synthesis in the generation of real-world evidence.

A Narrative Systematic Review and Categorisation of Outcomes in Inflammatory Bowel Disease to Inform a Core Outcome Set for Real-world Evidence.

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneity exists in reported outcomes and outcome measurement instruments [OMI] from observational studies. A core outcome set [COS] for observational and real-world evidence [RWE] in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] will facilitate pooling large datasets. This systematic review describes and classifies clinical and patient-reported outcomes, for COS development. METHODS: The systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases identified observational studies published between 2000 and 2021 using the population exposure outcome [PEO] framework. Studies meeting eligibility criteria were included. After titles and abstracts screening, full-text articles were extracted by two independent reviewers. Primary and secondary outcomes with corresponding OMI were extracted and categorised in accordance with OMERACT Filter 2.1 framework. The frequency of outcomes and OMIs are described. RESULTS: From 5854 studies, 315 were included: 129 [41%] Crohn's disease [CD], 60 [19%] ulcerative colitis [UC], and 126 [40%] inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] studies with 600 552 participants. Totals of 1632 outcomes and 1929 OMI were extracted mainly from medical therapy [181; 72%], surgical [34; 11%], and endoscopic [6; 2%] studies. Clinical and medical therapy-related safety were frequent outcome domains recorded in 194 and 100 studies. Medical therapy-related adverse events [n = 74] and need for surgery [n = 71] were the commonest outcomes. The most frequently reported OMI were patient or event numbers [n = 914], Harvey-Bradshaw Index [n = 45], and Montreal classification [n = 42]. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variability in outcomes reporting and OMI types. Categorised outcomes and OMI from this review will inform a Delphi consensus on a COS for future RWE in IBD. Data collection standardisation may enhance the quality of RWE applied to decision-making.

Can We Afford to Exclude Patients Throughout Health Technology Assessment?

Health technology assessment (HTA) is intended to determine the value of health technologies and, once a technology is recommended for funding, bridge clinical research and practice. Understanding the values and beliefs expressed by patients and health professionals can help guide this knowledge transfer and work toward managing the expectations of end users. We gathered patient and patient group leader experiences to gain insights into the roles that patients and patient advocacy groups are playing. We argue that through partnerships and co-creation between HTA professionals, researchers and patient advocates we can strengthen the HTA process and better align with service delivery where person-centered care and shared decision making are key elements. Patient experiences and knowledge are important to the democratization of evidence and the legitimacy of HTAs. Patient preference studies are used to balance benefits with potential harms of technologies, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can measure what matters to patients over time. A change in culture in HTA bodies is occurring and with further transformative thinking patients can be involved in every step of the HTA process. Patients have a right to be involved in HTAs, with patients' values central to HTA deliberations on a technology and where patients can provide valuable insights to inform HTA decision-making; and in ensuring that HTA methodologies evolve. By evaluating the implementation of HTA recommendations we can determine how HTA benefits patients and their communities. Our shared commitment can positively effect the common good and provide benefits to individual patients and their communities.

Patient-Evaluated Quality of Care is Related to Better Inflammatory Bowel Disease Outcomes: The IQCARO II Project.

BACKGROUND: Measuring quality of care (QoC) from a patient's perspective is becoming increasingly important in inflammatory bowel disease. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine whether patients' evaluations of QoC correlate with better inflammatory bowel disease outcomes. METHODS: A survey including patients' characteristics, a decalogue of QoC indicators, and self-reported disease outcomes was completed by Spanish patients with inflammatory bowel disease. A QoC index (QoCI) was constructed with the sum of the "yes" answers in the decalogue. We evaluated the correlation of QoCI with outcomes. A sub-analysis comparing patients with high QoCI vs those with low QoCI was performed (QoCI = 10 or ≤ 7). RESULTS: Seven hundred and eighty-eight questionnaires were analyzed. Mean age of participants was 43.4 years (63% women). Mean QoCI was 8.1 (± 2.4). The QoCI correlated significantly with activity of the disease, number of flares, emergency/unscheduled visits, and disease control. Patients scoring in the first QoCI quartile reported a decreased rate of moderate/severe disease (34.8% vs 55.3%, p < 0.001), fewer numbers of flares (p < 0.001), and fewer emergency/unscheduled visits (p < 0.001) compared with those in the lower QoCI quartile. The high QoC group also reported better disease control. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-evaluated QoC correlates with better outcomes. Evaluation of QoC by patients may be useful to detect inadequate care and improve inflammatory bowel disease outcomes.

Self-medication with oral corticosteroids reported by patients with ulcerative colitis: characteristics, reasons and patients' behaviors.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined self-medication with corticosteroids among patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). AIMS: To assess the frequency of self-medication with oral corticosteroids in UC patients, and associated factors and reasons. METHODS: An anonymous, voluntary, web-based survey was administered to adults with UC recruited via a Spanish patient association (ACCU) and hospital gastroenterology departments. Information was provided by patients; no clinical data were collected. Descriptive statistics and comparisons of frequencies are displayed. RESULTS: Among 546 respondents (mean age 39.9 years, median duration of UC since diagnosis 7 years,) 36 (6.6%) reported self-medication with oral corticosteroids during the past year (once: 23 patients; 2-3 times: 10 patients; >3 times: 3 patients). Self-medication was more common among patients managed in general gastroenterology vs. inflammatory bowel disease clinics [23 (9.0%) vs. 11 (2.9%), P = 0.019], patients with no regular follow-up [4 (22.2%) vs. 32 (6.1%), P = 0.026] and patients with more flares (P < 0.001). Patients who stored steroids from previous flares (17.9% vs. 6.0%, P < 0.001) or who lived with a partner taking steroids (9.3% vs. 1.1%, P = 0.038) were more likely to self-medicate than other patients. Common reasons for self-medicating included the need for quick symptom relief (55.6%), fear of worsening (47.2%) and difficulty in getting an appointment (25.0%). Only seven patients (19.4%) informed their physician when they started self-medicating and only four (11.1%) declared they would not start corticosteroids again. CONCLUSION: Self-medication with oral corticosteroids is not a common practice among patients with UC in Spain, but several areas of improvement exist.

Improving Quality of Care in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Through Patients' Eyes: IQCARO Project.

BACKGROUND: Quality improvement is a major topic in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care, and measuring quality of care (QoC) is necessary for QoC improvement. Most QoC projects or consensus statements are designed from the health care professional point of view. Having QoC indicators designed for and fully evaluable by patients may provide a key tool for external evaluation of QoC improvement measures. The aim of the IQCARO project was to identify indicators to measure QoC from the IBD patient's point of view. METHODS: An extensive review of the literature to identify indicators of QoC was performed; first the identified indicators were reviewed by a steering committee including patients, nurses, IBD specialists, and methodologists. Then 2 focus groups of IBD patients analyzed the QoC indicators to determine whether they could be understood and evaluated by patients. The final QoC indicators were selected by a group of IBD patients using a Delphi consensus methodology. RESULTS: An initial list of 54 QoC indicators was selected by the steering committee. The QoC indicators were evaluated by 16 patients who participated in 2 focus groups. They identified 21 indicators that fulfilled the understandability and evaluability requirements. The 10 most relevant QoC indicators were selected by 26 patients with IBD using a Delphi consensus. The selected items covered important aspects of QoC, including professionalism, patients' autonomy, information, accessibility, and continuity of care. CONCLUSIONS: The present Delphi consensus identified QoC indicators that are useful for developing and measuring improvement strategies in the management of IBD.

Patients' Experience and Needs During Perioperative Care: A Focus Group Study.

PURPOSE: Information regarding patients' needs, fears and experiences/perceptions in the perioperative setting is limited. Through two focus groups, we explored the needs, fears and experiences of patients who had recently undergone, or were scheduled for, surgery under general anaesthesia, with regard to the entire perioperative process. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults were invited to participate in a focus group if they had (a) undergone abdominal or gynaecological surgery with general anaesthesia in the past 4 months (focus group 1) or (b) been indicated for abdominal or gynaecological surgery and were waiting for the assigned surgery date (focus group 2). Discussions were audio recorded and, through thematic analysis, patients' needs and experiences/perceptions regarding perioperative surgical stages were obtained/coded. Analysis of code co-occurrence was performed using a codes matrix. RESULTS: Focus groups consisted of 13 females, 1 male (50% aged >45 years). The immediate postoperative period generated the highest number of co-occurrences, followed by the indication of surgery. The most frequent code was the need for information, especially at the indication of surgery, the pre-anaesthesia clinic and in the postoperative period. Fears were described particularly at the indication of surgery, the waiting period, the surgical room, anaesthesia induction and the postoperative period, particularly after hospital discharge; pain was cited most commonly in the postoperative period. Stress/anxiety and emotional impact were also cited in the postoperative period including home arrival. CONCLUSION: Information collected in these patients' focus groups should inform future research and healthcare planning. Patients demand receiving more comprehensive and understandable information and more involvement in several steps; this could reduce fears and stress/anxiety described across the perioperative process. Importantly, findings also extend to the postoperative period and home arrival.

Consensus document on the management preferences of patients with ulcerative colitis: points to consider and recommendations.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Our objective was to define, describe and organize (on the basis of consensus) the patient's preferences in the management of ulcerative colitis (UC), in order to further incorporate them in daily practice and improve patients satisfaction, adherence to the treatment and quality of care. METHODS: Qualitative study. A narrative literature review in Medline using Mesh and free-text terms was conducted to identify articles on UC patient preferences as well as clinical scenarios that may influence the preferences. The results were presented and discussed in a multidisciplinary nominal group meeting composed of six gastroenterologists, one primary care physician, one nurse practitioner and one expert patient. Key clinical scenarios and patient preferences were then defined, generating a series of points to consider and recommendations. The level of agreement with the final selection of preferences was established following a Delphi process. RESULTS: The narrative review retrieved 69 articles of qualitative design and moderate quality. The following key clinical scenarios were identified: diagnosis, follow-up, surgery, and special situations/patients profiles such as adolescents or women. Patient preferences were classified into information, treatment (pharmacological and non-pharmacological), follow-up, relations with health professionals, relations with the health system and administration. Finally, 11 recommendations on patient preferences for UC in relation to its management reached the level of agreement established. CONCLUSION: The consensual description of patient's preferences contribute to identify different areas for improvement in healthcare practice.

A Qualitative Research for Defining Meaningful Attributes for the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease from the Patient Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) are chronic, inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Each class and type of medication available for the treatment of IBD has distinct characteristics and long-term effects that a patient may consider. We present the results of qualitative research that aimed to develop a descriptive framework that outlines the most relevant disease and/or treatment attributes for IBD treatment decisions and focuses on the patient perspective. METHODS: This research employed a three-step approach: a literature review to identify a broad list of attributes, a focus group meeting including patients and clinicians to assess the relevance of the attributes, and two rounds of voting to name and define each attribute. The literature review was used to develop the initial list of attributes. Although the same attributes were defined for both UC and CD, the relative importance of each attribute to UC or CD was considered. The list of attributes was discussed and evaluated in the focus group meeting, which included eight patient representatives and nine gastroenterologists. Using feedback elicited from the focus group meeting, the research team developed a draft of the descriptive framework that grouped the attributes into domain subsets. All members of the focus group participated in two subsequent rounds of structured, online voting, which was used to refine the wording to name and define each attribute. Additionally, participants ranked all the attributes included in the descriptive framework to suggest which attributes were less relevant and could be omitted. RESULTS: Among 574 publications retrieved from the databases and registries, we identified 32 eligible publications, and an initial list of attributes was developed. This list was refined during the focus group meeting, resulting in a draft descriptive framework of attributes within subsets of domains. The final descriptive framework was developed based on structured rounds of online voting to further refine attribute names and definitions. In the final descriptive framework, a total of ten attributes were identified: abdominal pain, other disease-related pain, bowel urgency, fatigue, risk of cancer and serious infections within the next 10 years, risk of mild to moderate complications, aesthetic complications related to treatment, emotional status, sexual life, and social life and relationships. These attributes were distributed across three domains: efficacy, complications and risk, and health-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Through the identification of the ten most relevant attributes that influence patient decision making for IBD treatments, we developed a descriptive framework that should be considered by physicians when discussing IBD treatment options with their patients. The results of our qualitative research may also be helpful for the development of future IBD clinical studies and quantitative research.

[Prevalence of ten Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID) in Spain]. / La prevalencia de diez enfermedades inflamatorias inmunomediadas (IMID) en España.

OBJECTIVE: Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID) are chronic and highly disabling diseases that share inflammatory sequences and immunological dysregulations. Considered as a disease in itself, the prevalence of IMID is virtually unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of 10 selected UDI, including rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, ulcerative colitis, Crohn's disease, systemic lupus erythematosus, hidradenitis suppurativa, sarcoidosis and uveitis in Spain. METHODS: cross-sectional epidemiological study of point prevalence was made. This study was carried out through a series of computerized interviews in households chosen at random in 17 autonomous communities in Spain. A structured questionnaire was used to determine the frequency of diagnosis and the concurrence of 10 IMID in the respondents and other individuals belonging to the same family nucleus. The point prevalence estimates were used and compared with the objective of determining the frequency of IMID by age, sex and communities. The data were processed using Excel 2016 (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) and the SPSS V.019 system (IBM Corp. Armonk, NY, USA) for statistical analysis using the usual statistical tests in this type of studies. RESULTS: Of the 7,980 respondents, 510 were diagnosed with an IMID, representing a cross-sectional study of 6.39% (95% CI: 6.02-6.76). One, two, three or more members of the family were affected in 87.2%, 7.8% and 5% of positive relatives in IMID, respectively. The most recurrent diseases were psoriasis (2.69% [95% CI: 2.32-3.06]) and rheumatic arthritis (1.07% [95% CI: 0.70-1.44]). There were differences in prevalence due to sex (p = 0.004) and age (p = 0.000). No significant differences were identified related to geographic location (p = 0.819). Attendance of at least 2 IMID was reported in 8.9% of respondents. CONCLUSIONS: The overall prevalence was of the IMID studied was 6.39%, psoriasis being the most frequent with 2.69%. This study constitutes an initial step to consider IMID as an independent disease within the health system..

OBJETIVO: Las enfermedades inflamatorias inmunomediadas (IMID) son enfermedades crónicas y altamente discapacitantes que comparten secuencias inflamatorias y desregulaciones inmunológicas. Considerada como una enfermedad en sí, la prevalencia de la IMID es prácticamente desconocida. El objetivo de este trabajo fue valorar la prevalencia de 10 IMID seleccionadas, incluyendo artritis reumatoide, psoriasis, artritis psoriásica, espondilitis anquilosante, colitis ulcerosa, enfermedad de Crohn, lupus eritematoso sistémico, hidrosadenitis supurativa, sarcoidosis y uveítis en España. METODOS: Se hizo un estudio epidemiológico transversal de prevalencia puntual. Este estudio llevó a cabo a través de una serie de entrevistas informatizadas en hogares elegidos al azar en 17 comunidades autónomas en España. Mediante un cuestionario estructurado se determinó la frecuencia de diagnóstico y las concurrencias de 10 IMID en los encuestados y otros individuos pertenecientes al mismo núcleo familiar. Las estimaciones de prevalencia pun- tual se utilizaron y compararon con el objetivo de determinar la frecuencia de IMID por edad, sexo y comunidades. Los datos fueron procesados utilizando el programa Excel 2016 (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) y el sistema SPSS V.019 (IBM Corp. Armonk, NY, USA) para el análisis estadístico utilizando los test estadísticos habituales en este tipo de estudios. RESULTADOS: De los 7.980 encuestados, 510 fueron diagnosticados con una IMID, lo que representa un estudio transversal de un 6,39% (95% ci: 6,02-6,76). Uno, dos, tres o más miembros de la familia estaban afectados en un 87,2%, 7,8% y 5% de familiares positivos en IMID, respectivamente. Las enfermedades más recurrentes fueron psoriasis (2,69% [95% ci: 2,32-3,06]) y artritis reumática (1,07% [95% ci:0,70-1,44]). Se observaron diferencias en la prevalencia debidas al sexo (p=0,004) y edad (p=0,000). No se identificaron diferencias significativas relacionadas con la localización geográfica (p=0,819). Se reportó concurrencia de al menos 2 IMID en un 8,9% de encuestados. CONCLUSIONES: La prevalencia global fue de las IMID estudiadas fue del 6,39 % siendo las mas frecuentes la psoriasis con el 2,69%. Este estudio constituye un paso inicial para considerar la IMID como una enfermedad independiente dentro del sistema sanitario.

The experience of inflammatory bowel disease patients with healthcare: A survey with the IEXPAC instrument.

To assess inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients' experience of chronic illness care and the relationship with demographic and healthcare-related characteristics.This cross-sectional survey used the Instrument to Evaluate the EXperience of PAtients with Chronic diseases (IEXPAC) questionnaire to identify parameters associated with a better healthcare experience for IBD patients. IEXPAC questionnaire responses are grouped into 3 factors - productive interactions, new relational model, and patient self-management, scoring from 0 (worst) to 10 (best experience). Scores were analyzed by bivariate comparisons and multiple linear regression models.Surveys were returned by 341 of 575 patients (59.3%, mean age 46.8 (12.9) years, 48.2% women). Mean (SD) IEXPAC score was 5.9 (2.0); scores were higher for the productive interactions (7.7) and patient self-management factors (6.7) and much lower for the new relational model factor (2.2). Follow-up by a nurse, being seen by the same physician, and being treated with a lower number of medicines were associated with higher (better) overall patient experience score, and higher productive interactions and self-management factor scores. A higher productive interactions score was also associated with patients receiving medication subcutaneously or intravenously. Higher new relational model scores were associated with follow-up by a nurse, affiliation to a patients' association, receiving help from others for healthcare, a lower number of medicines and a higher educational level.In patients with IBD, a better overall patient experience was associated with follow-up by a nurse, being seen by the same physician, and being treated with a lower number of medicines.