Patient journeys: diagnosis and treatment of pernicious anaemia.

BACKGROUND: Instigating a patient support group for patients with pernicious anaemia (PA) revealed dissatisfaction with its current diagnosis and treatment. The authors investigated the clinical features, patient experience of diagnosis and treatment of PA in the UK. METHODS: A total of 889 patients registered with the PA Society support group completed an online survey or postal questionnaire. Outcome measures included clinical features, length of time to diagnosis and patient satisfaction with current treatment RESULTS: One-third of patients experienced symptoms for up to 1 year before diagnosis; 14% waited more than 10 years for a diagnosis. Neurological features were highly prevalent, the most common being memory loss and poor concentration. Nearly two-thirds of respondents were dissatisfied with current treatment; 10% used a non-licensed form of B12 to supplement their prescribed injections. CONCLUSION: The diagnosis and treatment of PA should be subject to a thorough review. This article discusses the patient survey and results and makes recommendations for how the diagnosis and treatment of PA may be evaluated.

Research priorities in pernicious anaemia: James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

OBJECTIVES: To form a James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) to determine research priorities related to the cause, diagnosis, treatment and management of pernicious anaemia (PA) from the perspectives of patients, carers and clinicians. DESIGN: The PSP conducted two surveys and a workshop to identify the Top 10 questions for research. A first survey identified questions relating to the cause, diagnosis, treatment and management of PA. A literature search checked whether any of these questions had already been answered. A second survey asked respondents to identify and rank their top 10 questions from the list of questions from the first survey. An online workshop used an adapted nominal group technique to agree a final Top 10. RESULTS: In the first survey, 933 people submitted 3480 responses that were categorised and summarised to generate a long list of 40 questions. None had been answered by previous research. The combined rankings from the 1068 patients, carers and clinicians who took part in the second survey identified a short list of 16 questions. These were discussed at the final workshop to agree the final Top 10. The number one question was about an accurate and reliable diagnostic test for PA. The other nine questions were about making treatment safe and effective, understanding why people with PA vary in their need for treatment, links to other conditions, and how to encourage clinicians to take PA seriously and provide long-term care. CONCLUSIONS: This JLA PSP enabled patients, carers and clinicians to work together to agree the Top 10 uncertainties relating to the cause, diagnosis, management and treatment of PA. Addressing any of these questions will greatly benefit the end-users of research, the people whose daily lives and decisions will be directly affected by generating high quality research evidence.