Are Quality Metrics in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Rooted on Substantial Quality Evidence? A Systematic Review

Quality improvement exercises in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) services: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Quality Improvement initiatives aim to improve care in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). These address a range of aspects of care including adherence to published guidelines. The objectives of this review were to document the scope and quality of published quality improvement initiatives in IBD, highlight successful interventions and the outcomes achieved.

DESIGN/METHOD

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data. We included peer reviewed articles or conference proceedings reporting initiatives intended to improve the quality of IBD care, with both baseline and prospectively collected follow-up data. Initiatives were categorised based on problems, interventions and outcomes. We used the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set instrument to appraise articles. We mapped the focus of the articles to the six domains of the IBD standards.

RESULTS

100 studies were identified (35 full text; 65 conference abstracts). Many focused on vaccination, medication, screening, or meeting multiple quality measures. Common interventions included provider education, the development of new service protocols, or enhancements to the electronic medical records. Studies principally focused on areas covered by the IBD standards 'ongoing care' and 'the IBD service', with less focus on standards 'pre-diagnosis', 'newly diagnosed', 'flare management', 'surgery' or 'inpatient care'.

CONCLUSION

Good quality evidence exists on approaches to improve the quality of a narrow range of IBD service functions, but there are many topic areas with little or no published quality improvement initiatives. We highlight successful quality improvement interventions and offer recommendations to improve reporting of future studies.

Impact of Care in an Interdisciplinary Inflammatory Bowel Disease Specialty Clinic on Outcomes in Patients Insured with Medicaid

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients are known to benefit from care delivered in a specialized, interdisciplinary setting. We aimed to evaluate the impact of this model on health outcomes, quality metrics, and health care resource utilization (HRU) in IBD patients insured with Medicaid.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In July 2017, IBD patients at our tertiary hospital were transitioned from a fellows' general gastroenterology (GI) clinic to a fellows' interdisciplinary IBD clinic. IBD patients were included if they were insured with Medicaid, had at least 1 visit in the general GI clinic between July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2017, and at least 1 visit between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018 in the IBD clinic. Characteristics related to patients' IBD course, overall health care maintenance, and HRU were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 170 patients (51% male, mean age 39 y) were included. After the transition to the IBD clinic, use of corticosteroids (37% vs. 25%; P =0.004) and combination therapy were significantly lower (55% vs. 38%; P =0.0004), although use of high-dose biologics numerically increased (58.5% vs. 67%; P =0.05). Posttransition, patients showed significantly lower levels of mean C-reactive protein ( P =0.04). After the transition, patients attended significantly fewer outpatient GI visits ( P =0.0008) but were more often seen by other health care specialists ( P =0.0003), and experienced a numeric decrease in HRU with fewer emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

Care in an interdisciplinary, IBD specialty setting is associated with significantly decreased corticosteroid use, decreased C-reactive protein levels, and improved access to ancillary services in Medicaid patients.

Quality of care in patients with inflammatory bowel disease from a public health center in Brazil

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are chronic diseases that demand continuous interaction between patients and healthcare providers. Quality of care (QoC) is a factor that contributes to a patient’s adherence to treatment and its success.

AIM

To evaluate QoC in patients from a single IBD reference center.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included 133 patients from a single Brazilian IBD public health center. QoC was evaluated through the QoC Through the Eyes of Patients with IBD (QUOTE-IBD) questionnaire (based on patient perspectives), which measures eight dimensions of care. We compared QoC among patients with Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis and analyzed the clinical and psychological factors associated with QoC satisfaction. Clinical evaluations assessed disease characteristics, quality of life, anxiety, and depression levels.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients with Crohn’s disease and 64 with ulcerative colitis were interviewed. The mean age was 37.26 years ± 13.05 years, and 63.91% of the patients were women. The mean duration of the disease was 8.44 years ± 7.59 years, where most patients were in remission (70.31% of patients with ulcerative colitis and 62.32% with Crohn’s disease). The total QoC score of the sample was 8.61 years ± 1.31 points, indicating that the QoC provided by the center was unsatisfactory. According to univariate logistic regression, patients with Crohn’s disease had higher satisfaction rates than those with ulcerative colitis [odds ratio (OR): 2.746; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.360-5.541; P = 0.0048] and patients on infliximab (OR: 2.175; 95%CI: 1.037-4.562; P = 0.0398).

CONCLUSION

Patients from the IBD public center reported good doctor-patient relationships, but had problems related to the healthcare structure. Evaluation of healthcare centers is of paramount to improve QoC for the patients involved.

Comparative Efficacy of Endoscopic Assist Devices on Colonic Adenoma Detection: A Systematic Review With Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Numerous endoscopic assist devices exist, yet data surrounding their comparative efficacy is lacking. We conducted a systematic review with network meta-analysis to determine the comparative efficacy of endoscopic assist devices on colonic adenoma detection.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed using multiple electronic databases through July 2020, to identify all randomized controlled trials and dual-arm observational studies compared with either other endoscopic assist devices and/or standard colonoscopy. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR). Secondary outcomes included polyp detection rate (PDR), serrated adenoma detection rate (SADR), right-sided adenoma detection rate (RADR), and proximal adenoma detection rate (PADR).

RESULTS

Fifty-seven studies (31,051 patients) met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Network meta-analysis identified an enhanced ADR among (clear) cap [odds ratio (OR): 2.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.45-4.99], endocuff, (OR: 4.95, 95% CI: 3.15-7.78), and endoring (OR: 3.68, 95% CI: 1.47-9.20)-with no significant difference amongst any particular device. Similar findings for PDR were also seen. Enhanced SADR was identified for endocuff (OR: 9.43) and endoring (OR: 4.06) compared with standard colonoscopy. Enhanced RADR (OR: 5.36) and PADR (OR: 3.78) were only identified for endocuff. Endocuff comparatively demonstrated the greatest ADR, PDR, and SADR, but this was not significant when compared with the other assist devices. Subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials identified enhanced PDR and ADR for both cap and endocuff.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic assist devices displayed increased ADR and PDR as compared with standard colonoscopy and thus should be widely adopted. A nonsignificant trend was seen toward higher efficacy for the endocuff device.

Challenges and Strategies to Optimising the Quality of Small Bowel Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Crohn’s Disease

Magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) is one of the most highly utilised tools in the assessment of patients with small bowel Crohn’s disease (CD). As a non-invasive modality, it has both patient and procedure-related advantages over ileocolonoscopy which is the current gold standard for Crohn’s disease activity assessment. MRE relies upon high-quality images to ensure accurate disease activity assessment; however, few studies have explored the impact of image quality on the accuracy of small bowel CD activity assessment. Bowel distension and motion artifacts are two key imaging parameters that impact the quality of images obtained through MRE. Multiple strategies have been employed to both minimise the effects of motion artifacts and improve bowel distension. This review discusses the definitions of bowel distension and motion artifacts within the literature with a particular focus on current strategies to improve bowel distension and limit motion artifacts in MRE.

Extra-Colonic Malignancy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: a Paucity of Recommendations with Weak Evidence

INTRODUCTION

Little data is available surrounding societal recommendations regarding extra-colonic malignancy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). As a result, we systematically analyzed these international guidelines to assess their overall quality as well as their adherence to standards for high-quality practice guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in multiple databases to identify all guidelines pertaining to extra-colonic malignancy in IBD in April 2020. All guidelines were reviewed for conflicts of interest (COI)/funding, recommendation quality and strength, external document review, use of patient representation, and plans for update-as per Institute of Medicine standards. In addition, recommendations were compared between guidelines/societies. Statistical analysis was conducted using R.

RESULTS

A total of 11 recommendations on extra-colonic malignancy in IBD were put forth by 5 guidelines/societies. Zero percent of recommendations were found to be based on high-quality evidence, 36.4% of recommendations on moderate-quality evidence, and 63.6% of recommendations on low-quality evidence. 9.1% were strong recommendations, 0% were weak/conditional recommendations, and 90.9% of recommendations did not provide a strength. No guideline included patient representation or had plans for future update of their recommendations.

CONCLUSION

There is a consistent lack of high-quality recommendations for extra-colonic malignancy in IBD across different societal guidelines. The need for high-quality studies to improve the strength of recommendations is eminent, as this will ultimately lead to high-quality patient care.