Assessing Patient Preferences for Intestinal Failure Management Using the Time Trade‐Off Methodology

Glucagon-like peptide 2 analogues in the treatment of intestinal failure: A qualitative exploration of the views of patients and their families in decision making

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Patients with short bowel syndrome and type 3 intestinal failure (SBS-IF) are dependent on parenteral nutrition (PN), a lifesaving treatment but inconvenient and with risks. Glucagon-like peptide 2 analogue (teduglutide) can reduce patients' need for PN. However, it comes with the risk of a number of side effects. This qualitative study investigated patients' decision making process to start teduglutide and how family members contributed to the decision.

METHODS

In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine participants, six patients with SBS-IF and three family members about the decision to take teduglutide. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using framework analysis.

RESULTS

The prominent motivation for taking teduglutide (Revestive® Takeda Pharmaceuticals Limited) was reducing or stopping PN. Other motivations were to help others by assisting in developing the knowledge base around teduglutide, patients felt that they had nothing to lose by trying the drug and the support of relatives. The reasons patients considered not taking the drug were that they had accepted being on PN, the potential side effects of teduglutide and undergoing extra monitoring. However, the monitoring programme also acted as a motivator providing reassurance that patients would be observed and supported with side effects. Family members were happy to support patients' decision to try teduglutide, although they had more reservations, indicating a higher risk threshold.

CONCLUSION

Patients considered potential benefits of teduglutide outweighed any disadvantages. Relatives, although supportive, had more reservations.

Detailed analysis of in-hospital costs for adult patients with type III intestinal failure: A single-center study with global implications

BACKGROUND

Home parenteral nutrition (HPN) is the recommended treatment for patients with type III intestinal failure (IF). However, owing to IF's rarity, the economic cost of managing these patients is not well understood. These patients often develop complications resulting in readmissions, which in turn contribute to ongoing costs. This study aims to document the costs of type III IF within the hospital, from initial admission, including readmissions, and to compare incurred costs with current government reimbursement.

METHODS

A retrospective study design reviewed costs and reimbursement for 25 consecutive patients commencing HPN at a quaternary hospital (October 2011 to September 2017). Hospital admissions were separated into the initial admission and readmission(s) period. Healthcare use and cost data were collected using electronic medical records. Hospital reimbursement costs were retrieved from Sydney Local Health District's Targeted Activity and Reporting Systems. Patient demographics were tabulated, and healthcare use and cost data were compared using Wilcoxon signed rank tests.

RESULTS

The median cost of the initial hospital admission was substantially higher than the median reimbursement ($36,675; interquartile range [IQR], $23,196-$67,439 vs $19,247; IQR, $7485-$41,090; P < .001). Similar results were observed in the readmissions period, with median incurred costs of $13,898; (IQR, $11,151-$32,130) vs reimbursement of $8469 (IQR, $5625-$13,078) (P = .001).

CONCLUSION

Results indicate that type III IF patients have high inpatient costs, which substantially outweigh current reimbursement. Improved funding models are needed to ensure hospitals that accept the management challenge of type III IF patients are not unduly penalized.