Top 10 research priorities for digital technology for adolescents and young persons with inflammatory bowel disease: Results of a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

OBJECTIVES: Priority Setting Partnerships (PSP's) using the James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology, bring together health professionals, patients and parents/carers to identify and prioritise unanswered questions that can be addressed by future research projects. To identify and prioritise the top 10 unanswered research priorities in digital technology for adolescents and young people (AYP) with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS: A steering group (SG) consisting of AYP with IBD, their parents/carers, representatives from two charities (Crohn's & Colitis UK, Crohn's in Childhood Research Association), patient information forum and paediatric and adult and primary care healthcare professionals was established in 2021. The SG agreed the protocol, and scope of the PSP and oversaw all aspects. SG meetings were chaired by a JLA advisor and followed the established JLA methodology. RESULTS: The initial survey generated 414 in-scope questions from 156 respondents, thematically categorised into 10 themes and consolidated into 92 summary questions by the SG. A comprehensive literature review followed by SG deliberation narrowed the unanswered summary questions to 45, for the interim prioritising survey. One hundred and two respondents ranked their top 10 research questions. Outputs generated top 18 research priorities presented at a final virtual prioritisation workshop, facilitated by JLA advisors and attended by key stakeholders, ranked into top 10 research priorities. DISCUSSION: The top 10 research priorities will encourage researchers to undertake research that addresses these areas of unmet need for AYP living with IBD, their parents/carers and their healthcare professionals, thereby facilitating improved patient care.

Patient and public involvement in the development of health services: Engagement of underserved populations in a quality improvement programme for inflammatory bowel disease using a community-based participatory approach.

INTRODUCTION: Involving people with lived experience is fundamental to healthcare development and delivery. This is especially true for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) services, where holistic and personalised models of care are becoming increasingly important. There is, however, a significant lack of representation of underserved and diverse groups in IBD research, and there are significant barriers to healthcare access and utilisation among minority groups in IBD. IBD centres need to be aware of these experiences to address barriers via service changes, improve interactions with local communities and promote meaningful engagement for improved health outcomes. METHODS: A pragmatic community-based approach was taken to engage with leaders and members of underserved groups across 11 workshops representing Roma, Afro-Caribbean, people of African descent and the wider black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities, Muslim women, refugee community members, deprived areas of South Yorkshire, LGBTQ+ and deaf populations. Thematic analysis of field notes identified patterns of attention across the community groups and where improvements to services were most frequently suggested. RESULTS: Findings demonstrated several barriers experienced to healthcare access and utilisation, including language accessibility, staff attitudes and awareness, mental health and stigma, continuity of support, and practical factors such as ease of service use and safe spaces. These barriers acted as a lever to co-producing service changes that are responsive to the health and social care needs of these groups. CONCLUSIONS: Engaging with people from a range of communities is imperative for ensuring that service improvements in IBD are accessible and representative of individual needs and values. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Local community leaders and members of community groups actively participated in the co-design and development of improvements to the IBD service for a local hospital. Their contributions further informed a pilot process for quality improvement programmes in IBD centres.

Development of an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) Patient-Reported Experience Measure (PREM): A patient-led consensus work and 'think aloud' study for a quality improvement programme.

BACKGROUND: Patient-Reported Experience Measures (PREMs) are key in improving healthcare quality, but no PREM exists for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). This study aimed to co-produce a PREM with IBD service users for IBD service evaluation and quality improvement programme. METHODS: A pool of 75 items was drawn from published survey instruments covering interactions with services and aspects of living with IBD. In Stage 1, during two workshops, eight expert service users reduced candidate items through a ranked-choice voting exercise and suggested further items. During Stage 2, 18 previously uninvolved people with IBD assessed the face and content validity of the candidate items in 'Think Aloud' interviews. During two final workshops (Stage 3), the expert service users removed, modified and added items based on the interview findings to produce a final version of the PREM. RESULTS: Stage 1 generated a draft working PREM mapped to the following four domains: Patient-Centred Care; Quality; Accessibility; Communication and Involvement. The PREM included a set of nine items created by the expert group which shifted the emphasis from 'self-management' to 'living with IBD'. Stage 2 interviews showed that comprehension of the PREM was very good, although there were concerns about the wording, IBD-relevance and ambiguity of some items. During the final two workshops in Stage 3, the expert service users removed 7 items, modified 15 items and added seven new ones based on the interview findings, resulting in a 38-item PREM. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates how extensive service user involvement can inform PREM development. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients were involved as active members of the research team and as research participants to co-produce and validate a PREM for IBD services. In Stage 1, eight expert service users ('the expert group') reduced candidate items for the PREM through a voting exercise and suggested new items. During Stage 2, 18 previously uninvolved people with IBD (the 'think aloud' participants) assessed the validity of the candidate items in 'Think Aloud' interviews as research participants. In Stage 3, the expert group removed, changed and added items based on the interview findings to produce a final version of the 38-item PREM. This study shows how service user involvement can meaningfully inform PREM development.

Evaluation of emergency hospital admissions for inflammatory bowel disease as a possible marker of quality of care of British IBD inflammatory bowel disease units.

Background: Key performance indicators (KPIs) are required to facilitate quality improvement for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Emergency admissions for IBD may represent a possible KPI. Methods: IBD emergency admissions for 2018-2019 from Hospital Episodes Statistics for England were compared per population and per IBD cases with patient-reported quality of care from the IBD Patient Survey 2019. Patient-reported accident and emergency (A&E) attendances and hospital admissions for IBD were also compared with patient-reported quality of care. Results: For 124 IBD services within England we found only a weak and not statistically significant correlation between IBD admissions per 100 000 population and patient-rated quality of care (Spearman's rho=0.171; p=0.057). Similarly, there was no significant correlation between IBD admissions per case and patient-rated quality of care (Spearman's rho=0.164; p=0.113). Patients with ≥2 A&E attendances (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.91; p<0.001) were less likely to report quality of IBD care as good or very good compared with those without A&E attendances. Patients with ≥2 admissions were less likely to rate their care as good or very good (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.65 to 0.88; p<0.0001) compared with those without hospital admissions. Conclusions: There is a clear association for individual patients with ≥2 admissions or A&E attendances with a lower perceived quality of care. In contrast we found no correlation on a per-unit basis for IBD admissions derived from Hospital Episode Statistics with patient-assessed quality of care. Further work is required to determine whether hospital admissions could be a useful KPI for IBD.

Establishing key performance indicators for inflammatory bowel disease in the UK.

Background and aims: Healthcare quality improvement (QI) is the systematic process to continuously improve the quality of care and outcomes for patients. The landmark Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) UK National Audits provided a means to measure the variation in care, highlighting the need to define the standards of excellence in IBD care. Through a consensus approach, we aimed to establish key performance indicators (KPIs), providing reliable benchmarks for IBD care delivery in UK. Methods: KPIs that measure critical aspects of a patient journey within an IBD service were identified though stakeholder meetings. A two-stage Delphi consensus was then conducted. The first involved a multidisciplinary team of IBD clinicians and patients to refine definitions and methodology. The second stage assessed feasibility and utility of the proposed QI process by surveying gastroenterology services across UK. Results: First, the four proposed KPIs were refined and included time from primary care referral to diagnosis in secondary care, time to treatment recommendation following a diagnosis, appropriate use of steroids and advanced therapies prescreening and assessment. Second, the Delphi consensus reported >85% agreement on the feasibility of local adoption of the QI process and >75% agreement on the utility of benchmarking of the KPIs. Conclusions: Through a structured approach, we propose quantifiable KPIs for benchmarking to improve and reduce the individual variation in IBD care across the UK.

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.