PTU-280 Establishing eligibility for case discussion in multidisciplinary team care within an inflammatory bowel disease service provision – results from a qualitative two-stage expert based study: Abstract PTU-280 Table 1

Gut ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 64 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. A184.1-A184
Author(s):  
P Morar ◽  
N Sevdalis ◽  
J Read ◽  
S Arora ◽  
J Warusavitarne ◽  
...  
1997 ◽  
Vol 93 (s37) ◽  
pp. 18P-19P
Author(s):  
Jack Satsangi ◽  
Miles Parkes ◽  
Eduoard Louis ◽  
KEN Welsh ◽  
John I Bell ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S616-S616
Author(s):  
G Herrerias ◽  
J R Ribeiro ◽  
R F Beraldo ◽  
R S Hossne ◽  
J P Baima ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is characterized by intestinal chronic inflammation that comprehend Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Continuous care is essential. Constant contact with the multidisciplinary team (MDT) and its quality of care interferes with treatment adherence and patients’ quality of life (QoL). MDT must be composed by at least gastroenterologists, coloproctologists, nutritionists, nurses and psychologists. The study evaluated the importance of MDT in the patients view. Methods A cross-sectional, descriptive study was developed, including 94 patients from a Brazilian IBD reference center. Clinical data and the MDT relevance were evaluated. MDT importance was assessed through a questionnaire developed for the research with the answers: nothing important, unimportant, important and very important for each professional. The patients listed professionals in order of importance. QoL was assessed by IBDQ. Treatment adherence and disease knowledge were assessed by Morisky and CCKNOW questionnaires respectively. Results A total of 54 patients with CD and 40 with UC were included, 59.57% female and 53.19% with comorbidities. Previous hospitalization was reported by 54.26% and 36.17% were submitted by previous surgery. The majority referred previous consultation with a gastroenterologist (95.74%) and less than half with nutritionist (47.87%), IBD nurse (43.62%), psychologist (43.62%) and coloproctologist (23.40%). Gastroenterologist was considered important or very important by all patients, coloproctologist by 97.15%, IBD nurse 94.36%, endoscopist nurse 86.16%, stomatherapist 78.19%, nutritionist 88.46% and psychologist 80.55%. Regarding the order of importance, patients reported the gastroenterologist (87.50%) as the most important, followed by the coloproctologist (16.67%) and IBD nurse (14.10%). Patients with CD had more appointments with IBD nurse compared to UC patients (p = 0.007). QoL was considered excellent or good (64.51%). Drug adherence was low in 58.89% of patients. Knowledge about the disease was considered low (2.65 ± 1.65 points), being higher in patients with CD (p = 0.04). Conclusion Although the service has MDT, not all patients had the opportunity to visit all professionals. The lack of contact with the entire team, especially with the nurse, can reflect on low medication adherence and disease knowledge, impacting on disease control and QoL. Holistic patient care is recommended, emphasizing the importance of all professionals in the MDT for all patients with IBD.


Gut ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (6) ◽  
pp. 984-990 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas A Kennedy ◽  
Gareth-Rhys Jones ◽  
Christopher A Lamb ◽  
Richard Appleby ◽  
Ian Arnott ◽  
...  

The COVID-19 pandemic is putting unprecedented pressures on healthcare systems globally. Early insights have been made possible by rapid sharing of data from China and Italy. In the UK, we have rapidly mobilised inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) centres in order that preparations can be made to protect our patients and the clinical services they rely on. This is a novel coronavirus; much is unknown as to how it will affect people with IBD. We also lack information about the impact of different immunosuppressive medications. To address this uncertainty, the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) COVID-19 IBD Working Group has used the best available data and expert opinion to generate a risk grid that groups patients into highest, moderate and lowest risk categories. This grid allows patients to be instructed to follow the UK government’s advice for shielding, stringent and standard advice regarding social distancing, respectively. Further considerations are given to service provision, medical and surgical therapy, endoscopy, imaging and clinical trials.


1996 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Satsangi ◽  
Miles Parkes ◽  
Edouard Louis ◽  
Lara Hashimoto ◽  
Norihiro Kato ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document