Inflammatory bowel disease patient-reported quality assessment should drive service improvement: a national survey of UK IBD units and patients.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare service provision in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is often designed to meet targets set by healthcare providers rather than those of patients. It is unclear whether this meets the needs of patients, as assessed by patients themselves. AIMS: To assess patients' experience of IBD and the healthcare they received, aiming to identify factors in IBD healthcare provision associated with perceived high-quality care. METHODS: Using the 2019 IBD standards as a framework, a national benchmarking tool for quality assessment in IBD was developed by IBD UK, comprising a patient survey and service self-assessment. RESULTS: 134 IBD services and 9757 patients responded. Perceived quality of care was lowest in young adults and increased with age, was higher in males and those >2 years since diagnosis. No hospital services met all the national IBD standards for recommended workforce numbers. Key metrics associated with patient-reported high- quality care were: identification as a tertiary centre, patient information availability, shared decision- making, rapid response to contact for advice, access to urgent review, joint medical/surgical clinics, and access to research (all p < 0.001). Higher numbers of IBD nurse specialists in a service was strongly associated with patients receiving regular reviews and having confidence in self-management and reporting high- quality care. CONCLUSIONS: This extensive patient and healthcare provider survey emphasises the importance of aspects of care less often measured by clinicians, such as communication, shared decision- making and provision of information. It demonstrates that IBD nurse specialists are crucial to meeting the needs of people living with IBD.

Data linkage can reduce the burden and increase the opportunities in the implementation of Value-Based Health Care policy: a study in patients with ulcerative colitis (PROUD-UC Study).

Introduction: Healthcare systems face rising demand and unsustainable cost pressures. In response, health policymakers are adopting Value-Based Health Care (VBHC), targeting available resources to achieve the best possible patient outcomes at the lowest possible cost and actively disinvesting in care of low-value. This requires the evaluation of longitudinal clinical and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) at an individual-level and population-scale, which can create significant data challenges. Achieving this through routinely collected electronic health record (EHR) data-linkage could facilitate the implementation of VBHC without an unacceptable data burden on patients or health systems and release time for higher-value activities. Objectives: Our study tested the ability to report an international, patient-centred outcome dataset (ICHOM-IBD) using only anonymised individual-level population-scale linked electronic health record (EHR) data sources, including clinical and patient-reported outcomes, in a cohort of patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC), receiving biopharmaceutical therapies ("biologics") in a single, publicly funded, healthcare system. Results: We identified a cohort of 17,632 patients with UC in Wales and a cohort from two Health Boards of 447 patients with UC receiving biologics. 112 of these patients had completed 866 condition-specific PROMs during their biologics treatment. 44 out of 59 (74.6%) items in the ICHOM-IBD could be derived from routinely collected data of which a primary care source was essential for eight items and desirable for 21. Conclusions: We demonstrated that it is possible to report most but not all the ICHOM-IBD outcomes using routinely collected data from multiple sources without additional system burden, potentially supporting Value-Based Health Care implementation with population data science. As digital collection of PROMs and use of condition-specific registries grow, greater utility of this approach can be anticipated. We have identified that the availability of longitudinal primary and secondary care data linked with PROMs is essential for this to be possible.

Infliximab versus ciclosporin for steroid-resistant acute severe ulcerative colitis (CONSTRUCT): a mixed methods, open-label, pragmatic randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Infliximab and ciclosporin are of similar efficacy in treating acute severe ulcerative colitis, but there has been no comparative evaluation of their relative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: In this mixed methods, open-label, pragmatic randomised trial, we recruited consenting patients aged 18 years or older at 52 district general and teaching hospitals in England, Scotland, and Wales who had been admitted, unscheduled, with severe ulcerative colitis and failed to respond to intravenous hydrocortisone within about 5 days. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either infliximab (5 mg/kg intravenous infusion given over 2 h at baseline, and again at 2 weeks and 6 weeks after the first infusion) or ciclosporin (2 mg/kg per day by continuous infusion for up to 7 days, followed by twice-daily tablets delivering 5·5 mg/kg per day for 12 weeks). Randomisation used a web-based password-protected site, with a dynamic algorithm to generate allocations on request, thus protecting against investigator preference or other subversion, while ensuring that each trial group was balanced by centre, which was the only stratification used. Local investigators and participants were aware of the treatment allocated, but the chief investigator and analysts were masked. Analysis was by treatment allocated. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted survival-ie, the area under the curve (AUC) of scores from the Crohn's and Ulcerative Colitis Questionnaire (CUCQ) completed by participants at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months, then every 6 months from 1 year to 3 years. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, number ISRCTN22663589. FINDINGS: Between June 17, 2010, and Feb 26, 2013, 270 patients were recruited. 135 patients were allocated to the infliximab group and 135 to the ciclosporin group. 121 (90%) patients in each group were included in the analysis of the primary outcome. There was no significant difference between groups in quality-adjusted survival (mean AUC 564·0 [SD 241·9] in the infliximab group vs 587·0 [226·2] in the ciclosporin group; mean adjusted difference 7·9 [95% CI -22·0 to 37·8]; p=0·603). Likewise, there were no significant differences between groups in the secondary outcomes of CUCQ scores, EQ-5D, or SF-6D scores; frequency of colectomy (55 [41%] of 135 patients in the infliximab group vs 65 [48%] of 135 patients in the ciclosporin group; p=0·223); or mean time to colectomy (811 [95% CI 707-912] days in the infliximab group vs 744 [638-850] days in the ciclosporin group; p=0·251). There were no differences in serious adverse reactions (16 reactions in 14 participants receiving infliximab vs ten in nine patients receiving ciclosporin); serious adverse events (21 in 16 patients vs 25 in 17 patients); or deaths (three in the infliximab group vs none in the ciclosporin group). INTERPRETATION: There was no significant difference between ciclosporin and infliximab in clinical effectiveness. FUNDING: NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme.

Multimodal treatment of perianal fistulas in Crohn's disease: seton versus anti-TNF versus advancement plasty (PISA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently there is no guideline for the treatment of patients with Crohn's disease and high perianal fistulas. Most patients receive anti-TNF medication, but no long-term results of this expensive medication have been described, nor has its efficiency been compared to surgical strategies. With this study, we hope to provide treatment consensus for daily clinical practice with reduction in costs. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multicentre, randomized controlled trial. Patients with Crohn's disease who are over 18 years of age, with newly diagnosed or recurrent active high perianal fistulas, with one internal opening and no anti-TNF usage in the past three months will be considered. Patients with proctitis, recto-vaginal fistulas or anal stenosis will be excluded. Prior to randomisation, an MRI and ileocolonoscopy are required. All treatment will start with seton placement and a course of antibiotics. Patients will then be randomised to: (1) chronic seton drainage (with oral 6-mercaptopurine (6MP)) for one year, (2) anti-TNF medication (with 6MP) for one year (seton removal after six weeks) or (3) advancement plasty after eight weeks of seton drainage (under four months anti-TNF and 6MP for one year). The primary outcome parameter is the number of patients needing fistula-related re-intervention(s). Secondary outcomes are the number of patients with closed fistulas (based on an evaluated MRI score) after 18 months, disease activity, quality of life and costs. DISCUSSION: The PISA trial is a multicentre, randomised controlled trial of patients with Crohn's disease and high perianal fistulas. With the comparison of three generally accepted treatment strategies, we will be able to comment on the efficiency of the various treatment strategies, with respect to several long-term outcome parameters. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register identifier: NTR4137 (registered on 23 August 2013).