General practitioners' knowledge of and attitudes to inflammatory bowel disease

Current practice and clinicians’ perception of medication non-adherence in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A survey of 98 clinicians

AIM

The survey ascertains perceptions and describes current practice of clinicians regarding medication non-adherence in patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

METHODS

Gastroenterologists, trainees and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) specialist nurses from the United Kingdom were invited to a web based survey collecting data on clinician demographics, patient volume and level of interest in IBD. Respondents were asked to estimate non-adherence levels and report use of screening tools and interventions to improve adherence.

RESULTS

Non-adherence was seen as an infrequent problem by 57% of 98 respondents. Levels of non-adherence were estimated lower than evidence suggests by 29% for mesalazine (5ASA), 26% for immunomodulators (IMM) and 21% for biologics (BIOL). Respondents reporting non-adherence as a frequent problem were more likely to report adherence levels in line with evidence (5ASA P < 0.001; IMM P = 0.012; BIOL P = 0.015). While 80% regarded screening as important only 25% screen regularly (40% of these with validated assessment tools). Respondents stated forgetfulness, beliefs about necessity of medication and not immediately apparent benefits as the main reasons for non-adherence. Patient counselling on benefits and risks of medication was a commonly used intervention.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians treating IBD patients frequently underestimate non-adherence and use of validated screening tools is infrequent. Most respondents identified the main factors associated with non-adherence in line with evidence and often counselled patients accordingly. Professional education should focus more on non-adherence practice to avoid adverse treatment outcomes associated with non-adherence.

Tools for primary care management of inflammatory bowel disease: Do they exist?

Healthcare systems throughout the world continue to face emerging challenges associated with chronic disease management. Due to the likely increase in chronic conditions in the future it is now vital that cooperation and support between specialists, generalists and primary health care physicians is conducted. Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is one such chronic disease. Despite specialist care being essential, much IBD care could and probably should be delivered in primary care with continued collaboration between all stakeholders. Whilst most primary care physicians only have few patients currently affected by IBD in their caseload, the proportion of patients with IBD-related healthcare issues cared for in the primary care setting appears to be widespread. Data suggests however, that primary care physician’s IBD knowledge and comfort in management is suboptimal. Current treatment guidelines for IBD are helpful but they are not designed for the primary care setting. Few non-expert IBD management tools or guidelines exist compared with those used for other chronic diseases such as asthma and scant data have been published regarding the usefulness of such tools including IBD action plans and associated supportive literature. The purpose of this review is to investigate what non-specialist tools, action plans or guidelines for IBD are published in readily searchable medical literature and compare these to those which exist for other chronic conditions.