Organisational changes and challenges for inflammatory bowel disease services in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic

Clinical service delivery implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with Inflammatory bowel disease: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, clinical services were severely disrupted, restricted, or withdrawn across the country. People living with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) - an auto-immune disorder for which medical treatment often results in immunosuppression, thus requiring regular monitoring-may have struggled to access clinical support. As part of a larger qualitative study, we investigated experiences of access to clinical services during the pandemic, and patient concerns about and preferences for services in the future.

METHODS

This exploratory qualitative study used semi-structured interviews to explore participants' experiences of clinical services across the UK during the pandemic. All data were collected remotely (March - May 2021) using online video-calling platforms or by telephone. Audio files were transcribed professionally and anonymised for analysis. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Of the eight themes found across all data, four related specifically to accessing GP, local (district) hospital, and specialist (tertiary) referral services for IBD: 1) The Risk of Attending Hospital; 2) Missing Routine Monitoring or Treatment; 3) Accessing Care as Needed, and 4) Remote Access and The Future.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support other studies reporting changes in use of health services, and concerns about future remote access methods. Maintenance of IBD services in some form is essential throughout crisis periods; newly diagnosed patients need additional support; future dependence on IBD services could be reduced through use of treatment / self-management plans. As the NHS digitalises it's future services, the mode of appointment-remote (telephone, video call), or in-person - needs to be flexible and suit the patient.

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.

Anxiety and behavioral changes in Japanese patients with inflammatory bowel disease due to COVID-19 pandemic: a national survey

BACKGROUND

Given the increasing health concerns for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, we investigated the impact of the pandemic on the anxiety and behavioral changes in Japanese patients with IBD.

METHODS

We analyzed 3032 questionnaires from patients with IBD, aged 16 years or older visiting 30 hospitals and 1 clinic between March 2020 and June 2021. The primary outcome was the score of the anxiety experienced by patients with IBD during the pandemic.

RESULTS

Participants reported a median age of 44 years; 43.3% of the patients were women. Moreover, 60.6% and 39.4% were diagnosed with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, respectively, with a median disease duration of 10 years. Participants indicated an average of disease-related anxiety score of 5.1 ± 2.5 on a ten-point scale, with a tendency to increase, 1 month after the number of infected persons per population increased. The top three causes for anxiety were the risk of contracting COVID-19 during hospital visits, SARS-CoV-2 infection due to IBD, and infection by IBD medication. Factors associated with anxiety were gender (women), being a homemaker, hospital visit timings, mode of transportation (train), use of immunosuppressive drugs, and nutritional therapy. Most patients continued attending their scheduled hospital visits, taking their medications, experienced the need for a family doctor, and sought guidance and information regarding COVID-19 from primary doctors, television, and Internet news.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IBD experienced moderate disease-related anxiety due to the pandemic and should be proactively informed about infectious diseases to relieve their anxiety.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Patients with IBD in a Prospective European Cohort Study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There are concerns regarding the potential impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. We report on the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak in a European prospective cohort study of patients with IBD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We prospectively collected data from 5457 patients with IBD nested in the ongoing I-CARE project and still followed up in April 2020, with monthly online monitoring of clinical activity, treatment, imaging and endoscopy. Investigators were also contacted to report incidental cases.

RESULTS

In total, 233 [4.3%] reported COVID-19 and 12 [0.2%] severe COVID-19, with no COVID-19 deaths. The risk of COVID-19 in patients with IBD was not increased compared to the general population (standardized incidence ratio [SIR]: 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.03-1.34], p = 0.009), as well as the risk of severe COVID-19 (SIR: 0.69, 95% CI [0.35-1.20], p = 0.93). We did not observe any negative impact of the different IBD-related medication on the risk of either COVID-19 or severe COVID-19. In 2020, the COVID-19 outbreak resulted in a drastic decrease in endoscopic and imaging procedures from March to May 2020 compared to 2018 and 2019. No impacts on clinical IBD disease activity as well as ongoing treatment were noted.

CONCLUSION

No increases in either COVID-19 or severe COVID-19 incidences were observed in patients with IBD. There was no impact of COVID-19 on IBD-related medication and clinical activity. Access to endoscopy and imaging was restricted during the first months of the first COVID-19 outbreak.

Uptake of a Switching Program for Patients Receiving Intravenous Infliximab and Vedolizumab to Subcutaneous Preparations

Background: Recent trials support the clinical efficacy and safety of subcutaneous infliximab (IFX) or vedolizumab (VDZ) for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). We evaluated the uptake and rationale for choosing to switch from intravenous infusions to subcutaneous injections. Methods: Retrospective analysis of all adult patients receiving standard dosing IFX or VDZ maintenance therapy to investigate uptake of subcutaneous injections and the rationale for switching to subcutaneous injections. Results: Of 232 eligible patients (total = 258: IFX = 190, VDZ = 68, and no longer eligible = 26), 58% of patients on IFX and 59% of patients on VDZ chose to switch to subcutaneous treatment. Age, sex, diagnosis, drug, line of treatment, and duration of treatment were not predictors for willingness to switch. Questionnaire responses (n = 51) demonstrate that the decision to switch was not influenced by COVID-19 exposure risk, impact on wider IBD service provision, impact on patient mental health, financial savings, seeking support following a switch, or a sense of independence managing IBD. Switchers (68%) were more motivated by time savings than non-switchers (25%; p = 0.0042). Conclusions: Switch uptake rates were 58%, with 90% of patients eligible to switch. Switch decision was influenced by time savings for patients but not by other patient-related factors.

The Value of a Dedicated IBD Flare Clinic to Effectively Manage Exacerbations of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: The Edinburgh IBD Unit

We assessed the impact of a dedicated inflammatory bowel disease flare clinic. Attenders had more changes to maintenance medications made and less steroid use than inflammatory bowel disease patients reviewed at the Acute Receiving Unit. This model of care may potentially reduce hospital admissions.

Recent advances in clinical practice: management of inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has raised considerable concerns that patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), particularly those treated with immunosuppressive therapies, may have an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition, develop worse outcomes following COVID-19, and have suboptimal vaccine response compared with the general population. In this review, we summarise data on the risk of COVID-19 and associated outcomes, and latest guidance on SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with IBD. Emerging evidence suggests that commonly used medications for IBD, such as corticosteroids but not biologicals, were associated with adverse outcomes to COVID-19. There has been no increased risk of de novo, or delayed, IBD diagnoses, however, an overall decrease in endoscopy procedures has led to a rise in the number of missed endoscopic-detected cancers during the pandemic. The impact of IBD medication on vaccine response has been a research priority recently. Data suggest that patients with IBD treated with antitumour necrosis factor (TNF) medications had attenuated humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, and more rapid antibody decay, compared with non-anti-TNF-treated patients. Reassuringly, rates of breakthrough infections and hospitalisations in all patients who received vaccines, irrespective of IBD treatment, remained low. International guidelines recommend that all patients with IBD treated with immunosuppressive therapies should receive, at any point during their treatment cycle, three primary doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines with a further booster dose as soon as possible. Future research should focus on our understanding of the rate of antibody decay in biological-treated patients, which patients require additional doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, the long-term risks of COVID-19 on IBD disease course and activity, and the potential risk of long COVID-19 in patients with IBD.

Perspectives on Subcutaneous Infliximab for Rheumatic Diseases and Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Before, During, and After the COVID-19 Era

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has prompted significant changes in patient care in rheumatology and gastroenterology, with clinical guidance issued to manage ongoing therapy while minimising the risk of nosocomial infection for patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Subcutaneous (SC) formulations of biologics enable patients to self-administer treatments at home; however, switching between agents may be undesirable. CT-P13 SC is the first SC formulation of infliximab that received regulatory approval and may be termed a biobetter as it offers significant clinical advantages over intravenous (IV) infliximab, including improved pharmacokinetics and a convenient mode of delivery. Potential benefits in terms of reduced immunogenicity have also been suggested. With a new SC formulation, infliximab provides an additional option for dual formulation, which enables patients to transition from IV to SC administration route without changing agent. Before COVID-19, clinical trials supported the efficacy and safety of switching from IV to SC infliximab for patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and SC infliximab may have been selected on the basis of patient and HCP preferences for SC agents. During the pandemic, patients with rheumatic diseases and IBD have successfully switched from IV to SC infliximab, with some clinical benefits and high levels of patient satisfaction. As patients switched to SC therapeutics, the reduction in resource requirements for IV infusion services may have been particularly welcome given the pandemic, facilitating reorganisation and redeployment in overstretched healthcare systems, alongside pharmacoeconomic benefits and a reduction in exposure to nosocomial infection. Telemedicine and contactless healthcare have been pushed to the forefront during the pandemic, and a lasting shift towards remote patient management and community/home-based drug administration is anticipated. SC infliximab supports the implementation of this paradigm for future improvements of healthcare value delivered. The accumulation of real-world data during the pandemic supports the high level of confidence, with patients, physicians, and healthcare systems benefitting from its uptake.

Scoping review with textual narrative synthesis of the literature reporting stress and burn-out in specialist nurses: making the case for inflammatory bowel disease nurse specialists

Objective

Inflammatory bowel disease clinical nurse specialists (IBD-CNSs) face increasing pressures due to rising clinical and patient demands, advanced complexity of work role, and minimal specialist management training and support. Stress and burn-out could undermine the stability of this workforce, disrupting clinical provision. We reviewed the literature on stress and burn-out to demonstrate the lack of evidence pertinent to IBD-CNSs and make the case for further research.

Design

Following Levac et al’s scoping review framework, relevant databases were searched for publications reporting work-related stress and burn-out among specialist nurses. Following screening and consensus on selection of the final articles for review, all authors contributed to data charting. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Scoping Review extension guided reporting of the review.

Results

Of 194 retrieved articles, eight were eligible for review. None focused on IBD-CNSs, were qualitative, or UK-based. Three core themes were identified: Rates of Burn-out, Mitigating and Alleviating Factors, and Preventing and Resolving Burn-out. Risk of burn-out is greatest in novice and mid-career CNSs. Age and duration in role appear protective. Personal achievement is also protective and can mitigate earlier episodes of burn-out; opportunities for career progression are limited. Promoting personal well-being is beneficial. Senior managers have poor understanding of the role and provide inadequate support. Commitment to patients remains high.

Conclusion

Burn-out arises in CNSs across clinical specialisms in the international literature and has a significant negative effect on the workforce. Further research is needed to address the dearth of evidence on burn-out in IBD-CNSs in the UK.

Efficacy and Safety of Elective Switching from Intravenous to Subcutaneous Infliximab [CT-P13]: A Multicentre Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Intravenous [IV] infliximab is a well-established therapy for inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] patients. A subcutaneous [SC] formulation of infliximab [CT-P13] has recently been shown to be as effective as IV infliximab after two doses of IV induction in a randomised trial, but there are no data to support elective switching of patients on maintenance IV infliximab therapy. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of an elective switching programme to SC CT-P13 in patients treated with IV infliximab.

METHODS

Patients on established maintenance IV infliximab, who switched to SC CT-P13, were included in this retrospective multicentre cohort study. Disease activity was monitored serially with the Harvey-Bradshaw Index [HBI] for Crohn's disease [CD] and the Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index [SCCAI] for ulcerative colitis (UC) for up to 12 months at months 3, 6, and 12. Faecal calprotectin [FC] and C-reactive protein [CRP] were recorded at baseline and follow-up, if available. Infliximab trough levels were measured prior to switch and at months 3, 6, and 12 following switch. The primary outcome measure was treatment persistence at latest follow-up. Secondary outcome measures included infliximab pharmacokinetics [PK], safety, need for corticosteroid rescue therapy, and need for surgery.

RESULTS

We included 181 patients, of whom 115 [63.5%] had CD. The majority [72.4%] were on 8-weekly dosing of intravenous infliximab prior to switching, and more than half [59.1%] were on concomitant immunomodulatory therapy. The majority of patients (CD: 106, 92.2%; UC: 46, 76.7%; and IBD unclassified [IBD-U]: 5, 83.3%) were in clinical remission. Treatment persistence rate was high [n = 167, 92.3%] and only 14 patients [7.7%] stopped treatment during the follow-up period. There was no significant difference between baseline and repeat measurements at 3, 6, or 12 months for HBI, SCCAI, CRP, or FC. Of the total cohort, 25 patients (13.8%) had perianal CD. Of these, only two patients [8%] had worsening of perianal CD and required antibiotic therapy and further examination under anaesthesia [EUA]. Both these patients also switched back to intravenous infliximab. Median infliximab level increased from a baseline of 8.9 µg/dl [range 0.4-16] to 16.0 µg/dl [range 2.3-16, p <0.001] at 3 months. Serum levels stayed stable at 6 months [median 16 µg/dl, range 0.3-17.2] and 12 months [median 16 µg/dl, range 0.3-19.1, both p <0.001 compared with baseline]. Among the variables examined, only antibodies to infliximab [ATI] was associated with infliximab levels (odds ratio [OR] -13.369, 95% CI -15.405, -11.333, p <0.001]. A total of 14 patients [7.7%] developed ATI; of these, nine [64.3%] were on concomitant immunomodulatory therapy. Immunomodulatory therapy was not significantly associated with development of ATI [p = 0.15]. In a subset of patients receiving escalated IV infliximab dosing frequency prior to switching, no difference in treatment persistence was observed in patients receiving weekly versus alternate weekly SC CT-P13. Patient acceptance and satisfaction rates with SC CT-P13 were very high.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients on IV infliximab maintenance therapy switched to SC CT-P13, we observed high treatment persistence rates and low rates of immunogenicity, with no change in clinical disease activity indices or biomarkers. Infliximab levels increased after switch to SC CT-P13, and only ATI was associated with serum infliximab levels. Patient acceptance and satisfaction rates were high with SC CT-P13.

Ambulatory care management of 69 patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis in comparison to 695 inpatients: insights from a multicentre UK cohort study

Introduction

Acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) traditionally requires inpatient hospital management for intravenous therapies and/or colectomy. Ambulatory ASUC care has not yet been evaluated in large cohorts.

Aims

We used data from PROTECT, a UK multicentre observational COVID-19 inflammatory bowel disease study, to report the extent, safety and effectiveness of ASUC ambulatory pathways.

Methods

Adults (≥18 years old) meeting Truelove and Witts criteria between 1 January 2019–1 June 2019 and 1 March 2020–30 June 2020 were recruited to PROTECT. We used demographic, disease phenotype, treatment outcomes and 3-month follow-up data. Primary outcome was rate of colectomy during the index ASUC episode. Secondary outcomes included corticosteroid response, time to and rate of rescue or primary induction therapy, response to rescue or primary induction therapy, time to colectomy, mortality, duration of inpatient treatment and hospital readmission and colectomy within 3 months of index flare. We compared outcomes in three cohorts: (1) patients treated entirely in inpatient setting; ambulatory patients subdivided into; (2) patients managed as ambulatory from diagnosis and (3) patients hospitalised and subsequently discharged to ambulatory care for continued intravenous steroids.

Results

37% (22/60) participating hospitals used ambulatory pathways. Of 764 eligible patients, 695 (91%) patients received entirely inpatient care, 15 (2%) patients were managed as ambulatory from diagnosis and 54 (7%) patients were discharged to ambulatory pathways. Aside from younger age in patients treated as ambulatory from diagnosis, no significant differences in disease or patient phenotype were observed. The rate of colectomy (15.0% (104/695) vs 13.3% (2/15) vs 13.0% (7/54), respectively, p=0.96) and secondary outcomes were similar among all three cohorts. Stool culture and flexible sigmoidoscopy were less frequently performed in ambulatory cohorts. Forty per cent of patients treated as ambulatory from diagnosis required subsequent hospital admission.

Conclusions

In a post hoc analysis of one of the largest ASUC cohorts collected to date, we report an emerging UK ambulatory practice which challenges treatment paradigms. However, our analysis remains underpowered to detect key outcome measures and further studies exploring clinical and cost-effectiveness as well as patient and physician acceptability are needed.

Trial registration number

NCT04411784.

UK-wide study of the opinions of gastroenterology trainees: COVID-19, Shape of Training and the future workforce

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted training. Gastroenterology higher specialty training is soon to be reduced from 5 years to 4. The British Society of Gastroenterology Trainees Section biennial survey aims to delineate the impact of COVID-19 on training and the opinions on changes to training.

METHODS

An electronic survey allowing for anonymised responses at the point of completion was distributed to all gastroenterology trainees from September to November 2020.

RESULTS

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, 71.0% of the respondents stated that more than 50% of their clinical time was mostly within general internal medicine. Trainees reported a significant impact on all aspects of their gastroenterology training due to lost training opportunities and increasing service commitments. During the first wave, 88.5% of the respondents reported no access to endoscopy training lists. Since this time, 66.2% of the respondents stated that their endoscopy training lists had restarted. This has resulted in fewer respondents achieving endoscopy accreditation. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused 42.2% of the respondents to consider extending their training to obtain the skills required to complete training. Furthermore, 10.0% of the respondents reported concerns of a delay to completion of training. The majority of respondents (84.2%) reported that they would not feel ready to be a consultant after 4 years of training.

CONCLUSIONS

Reductions in all aspects of gastroenterology training were reported. This is mirrored in anticipated concerns about completion of training in a shorter training programme as proposed in the new curriculum. Work is now required to ensure training is restored following the pandemic.

COVID-19: Effect on gastroenterology and hepatology service provision and training: Lessons learnt and planning for the future

In late 2019, reports arose of a new respiratory disease in China, identified as a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The World Health Organisation named the disease caused by the virus 'coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)'. It was declared a pandemic in early 2020, after the disease rapidly spread across the world. COVID-19 has not only resulted in substantial morbidity and mortality but also significantly impacted healthcare service provision and training across all medical specialties with gastroenterology and Hepatology services being no exception. Internationally, most, if not all 'non-urgent' services have been placed on hold during surges of infections. As a result there have been delayed diagnoses, procedures, and surgeries which will undoubtedly result in increased morbidity and mortality. Outpatient services have been converted to remote consultations where possible in many countries. Trainees have been redeployed to help care for COVID-19 patients in other settings, resulting in disruption to their training - particularly endoscopy and outpatient clinics. This has led to significant anxiety amongst trainees, and risks prolongation of training. It is of the utmost importance to develop strategies that continue to support COVID-19-related service provision, whilst also supporting existing and future gastroenterology and Hepatology services and training. Changes to healthcare provision during the pandemic have generated new and improved frameworks of service and training delivery, which can be adopted in the post-COVID-19 world, leading to enhanced patient care.

Comparative Outcomes of Budesonide MMX versus Prednisolone for Ulcerative Colitis: Results from a British Retrospective Multi-Centre Real-World Study

During the COVID-19 pandemic many IBD units chose Budesonide MMX (Cortiment) as the first-line treatment for flares of ulcerative colitis (UC) in outpatients for its favourable side effect profile. This retrospective study of all UC patients treated with oral steroids between 1 March 2019–30 June 2019 and 1 March 2020–30 June 2020 aimed to compare Cortiment with Prednisolone in routine clinical practice. Outcomes included the need for hospitalisation for acute severe ulcerative colitis, symptoms at four weeks and end of treatment, and the need for rescue Prednisolone. The 2019 and 2020 cohorts did not differ at the baseline. Cortiment prescriptions rose from 24.5% in 2019 to 70.1% in 2020 (p < 0.001). At week four there were significant differences between 2019 and 2020 in mean bowel frequency (3.49 vs. 5.85, p = 0.001), rectal bleeding <50% (89.7% vs. 73.1% of patients, p = 0.039), and physician global assessment (PGA) (39.2% vs. 19.8% in remission, p = 0.045). There was no significant difference in hospital admissions, rectal bleeding, and PGA at week eight. Rescue Prednisolone was required in 10% of Cortiment patients in 2019 vs. 31.3% in 2020 (p = 0.058). Active IBD is associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes prompting the careful evaluation of the choice of first-line steroid for UC, as Cortiment was associated with worse outcomes at four weeks.

Priorities for research during the Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic and beyond: a survey of nurses, midwives and health visitors in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

The Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant burden on global healthcare systems. Nurses, midwives and health visitors remain critical to the rapid responses and innovative solutions required. Their views, however, on priorities for research is mainly muted, necessitating greater clarity to inform research that benefits patients and families across the life course.

AIMS

To identify priorities for research in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic and 'beyond', as recommended by nurses, midwives and health visitors across the four countries of the United Kingdom (UK).

METHODS

A cross-sectional, web-based survey design was conducted (5th May-4th June 2020). In addition to the completion of demographic information, respondents identified up to three research areas important to their clinical care/practice in the context of COVID-19 and beyond. Data were imported for analysis into NVivo 12 (QSR International). Descriptive analysis was used to summarise the demographic variables. Free text responses were analysed using a semantic, inductive thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

In total 1,296 responses were received from a self-selected sample of predominantly of female, registered nurses of white British ethnicity, located in England and working for acute care providers, providing 3,444 research priority recommendations. Four higher-order themes emerged, (1) New and unknown frontiers; (2) Care and treatment solutions; (3) Healthcare leadership and inclusive workforce; and (4) Emotional and mental health impact.

CONCLUSIONS

At a time of significant global uncertainty, the collective voice of nursing, midwifery and health visiting is never more important to inform clinical research. Whilst generalisability is limited by the homogeneity of the sample, this is the first survey to elicit the priorities for research in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond from nurses, midwives and health visitors in the UK. Novel findings developed through a rigorous analytical approach illuminate areas that require both urgent and long-term attention and provide a platform to direct priority refinement, future research and the basis for evidence translation.

Review of a paediatric inflammatory bowel disease service during the pandemic and the impact of the CNS role

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic relapsing and remitting condition. The COVID-19 pandemic has severely disrupted provision of medical care across the world. IBD clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) played a pivotal role in the care of children with IBD during the pandemic national lockdown and in the recovery phase. This article aims to look at the impact of COVID-19 on the paediatric IBD service in one children's hospital and the effect on the IBD CNSs' workload.

METHOD

A retrospective review of clinical notes and the service's IBD database from January 2019 to September 2020.

RESULTS

There was a significant increase in the number of email and telephone contacts to the IBD CNS team during lockdown. There was an increase in virtual clinics, and an increase in new IBD patients coming to the service, but a reduction in the number of face-to-face consultant clinics.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 has disrupted medical services to children with IBD and led to a reduction in face-to-face activities but has also led to a significant increase in virtual activities. CNSs have taken up a wider role to cover patient care during a time of both medical and nursing redeployment.

Optimal inflammatory bowel disease management during the global coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to summarize the current evidence regarding the risks and implications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and discuss optimal management of IBD during this pandemic.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with IBD are not at increased risk of COVID-19 but several risk factors for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 infection) have been identified, such as active IBD, obesity, and corticosteroid use. COVID-19 outcomes are similar among patients with IBD and the overall population. Although biologics have not been shown to increase the risk of severe COVID-19 complications, several risk factors have been associated with negative COVID-19 outcomes in patients with IBD, including older age, obesity, the presence of comorbidities, active disease, and corticosteroid use. IBD therapy should, therefore, be continued with the aim of attaining or maintaining remission, except for corticosteroids, which should be held or reduced to the minimal effective dose. Although it has been recommended that immunosuppressive therapy be held during a case of COVID-19, the half-lives of these drugs and data on the timing of restarting therapy limit the strength of these recommendations. We recommend COVID-19 vaccination for IBD patients whenever available, as benefits to the individual and to society outweigh the risks.

SUMMARY

As our understanding of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 continues to evolve, we are learning more about its impact in patients with IBD and how to better manage patients in this setting. Managing IBD during this pandemic has also highlighted the importance of restructuring services in order to adapt to current and potential future outbreaks. The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed IBD care through the expansion of telemedicine and development of novel approaches to remote monitoring.

Using e-health tools and PROMs to support self-management in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

The use of digital health or e-health is growing. The potential positive impact on IBD care from supported self-management using these tools emerged from a literature review carried out in preparation for a service improvement project. A patient-reported outcomes measure (PROM) with validation across IBD sub-types was already available for use. This internationally recognised tool has potential for use with existing or new e-health systems.

AIMS

In order to test the concept of using PROMs to support practice and follow up a small-scale pilot study was designed. The aim of the study was to understand if empowering patients to undertake supported self-management could lead in turn to improved flow through outpatient services.

METHODS

An audit was carried out of PROMs looking at quality of life (QoL) as well as disease activity using an electronic platform in real time at the point of patient contact. The disease activity indices used were the Harvey Bradshaw Index and the Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index, due to the author's familiarity with these tools.

RESULTS

Of the 15 participants, 10 reported themselves as 'well' or 'well with questions' all participants reported an acceptance of supported remote self-management using e-health.

CONCLUSION

This evaluation led to PROMs being captured on a tablet in the outpatient setting in the pre-pandemic period. Allowing patients to use the PROM as a tool in the outpatient setting has led to longitudinal data being added to the e-health system for each individual. Well patients could be managed remotely, freeing capacity in outpatient clinics.

Implementation of the Uniformed Services University Pain Registry Biobank: A Military and Veteran Population Focused Biobank and Registry

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this overview is to discuss the development, implementation, data content, and structure of the Uniformed Services University Pain Registry Biobank. Additionally, procedures and policies for accessing samples for pain-related research purposes are detailed.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional overview.

SETTING

Multiple military treatment facilities.

SUBJECTS

Adult beneficiaries seeking care within the Military Health System.

METHODS

Participants complete a baseline battery of biopsychosocial survey measures, including PROMIS® measures, provide biologic samples (e.g. blood and saliva), and relevant health history, including medications and surgical history, is extracted from medical records. During the course of the next year, enrolled participants complete surveys and provide biologic samples at 3-months, 6-months, and 12-months. Thereafter, participants are contacted once annually to complete self-reported assessments and provide biologic samples.

RESULTS

In the first year alone 86 subjects have participated in the Uniformed Services University Pain Registry Biobank and provided 390 observations (e.g. biological samples and biopsychosocial patient-reported outcomes). The Uniformed Services University Pain Registry Biobank's integration of biological samples, patient-reported outcomes, and health record data over a longitudinal period across a diverse sample recruited from multiple military facilities addresses many of the limitations faced by other pain-related registries or biorepositories.

CONCLUSIONS

The Uniformed Services University Pain Registry Biobank will serve as a platform for conducting research closely aligned with the Federal Pain Research Strategy. The inclusion of active duty service members, beneficiaries, and civilians living with and without acute or chronic pain provides a unique data repository for all investigators interested in advancing pain science.

Point-of-care faecal calprotectin testing in patients with paediatric inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVES

Following the disruption of normal paediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) services during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, we prospectively audited the first-time use of home faecal calprotectin testing. We aimed to provide an alternative to laboratory tests and to assess the value of home testing as part of our regular services going forward.

METHODS

Home test kits as well as accompanying user instructions were made available to our patients with paediatric IBD that required faecal calprotectin test between 17 April and 12 August 2020. Once the user completed the test, results were automatically uploaded to the result portal and clinical staff were alerted. A user feedback questionnaire was sent to users that had completed the home test.

RESULTS

Of the 54 patients, 41 (76%) aged between 4.7 and 18.1 years used the home test. A total of 45 home tests were done, one of which produced an invalid result. The decision to modify management was made in 12 (29%) of the patients, while 14 (34%) had no changes made and 15 (37%) required further assessment. Twenty (48.8%) responded to the questionnaire and 85% stated that they preferred the home test to the laboratory testing method.

CONCLUSIONS

Home calprotectin tests were useful in guiding clinical management during a time when laboratory testing was less available. They may offer benefits as part of routine paediatric IBD monitoring to help target appointments and reduce unnecessary hospital attendances in the future.

Assessment, endoscopy, and treatment in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis during the COVID-19 pandemic (PROTECT-ASUC): a multicentre, observational, case-control study

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of evidence to support safe and effective management of patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to identify alterations to established conventional evidence-based management of acute severe ulcerative colitis during the early COVID-19 pandemic, the effect on outcomes, and any associations with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes.

METHODS

The PROTECT-ASUC study was a multicentre, observational, case-control study in 60 acute secondary care hospitals throughout the UK. We included adults (≥18 years) with either ulcerative colitis or inflammatory bowel disease unclassified, who presented with acute severe ulcerative colitis and fulfilled the Truelove and Witts criteria. Cases and controls were identified as either admitted or managed in emergency ambulatory care settings between March 1, 2020, and June 30, 2020 (COVID-19 pandemic period cohort), or between Jan 1, 2019, and June 30, 2019 (historical control cohort), respectively. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis receiving rescue therapy (including primary induction) or colectomy. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04411784.

FINDINGS

We included 782 patients (398 in the pandemic period cohort and 384 in the historical control cohort) who met the Truelove and Witts criteria for acute severe ulcerative colitis. The proportion of patients receiving rescue therapy (including primary induction) or surgery was higher during the pandemic period than in the historical period (217 [55%] of 393 patients vs 159 [42%] of 380 patients; p=0·00024) and the time to rescue therapy was shorter in the pandemic cohort than in the historical cohort (p=0·0026). This difference was driven by a greater use of rescue and primary induction therapies with biologicals, ciclosporin, or tofacitinib in the COVID-19 pandemic period cohort than in the historical control period cohort (177 [46%] of 387 patients in the COVID-19 cohort vs 134 [36%] of 373 patients in the historical cohort; p=0·0064). During the pandemic, more patients received ambulatory (outpatient) intravenous steroids (51 [13%] of 385 patients vs 19 [5%] of 360 patients; p=0·00023). Fewer patients received thiopurines (29 [7%] of 398 patients vs 46 [12%] of 384; p=0·029) and 5-aminosalicylic acids (67 [17%] of 398 patients vs 98 [26%] of 384; p=0·0037) during the pandemic than in the historical control period. Colectomy rates were similar between the pandemic and historical control groups (64 [16%] of 389 vs 50 [13%] of 375; p=0·26); however, laparoscopic surgery was less frequently performed during the pandemic period (34 [53%] of 64] vs 38 [76%] of 50; p=0·018). Five (2%) of 253 patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during hospital treatment. Two (2%) of 103 patients re-tested for SARS-CoV-2 during the 3-month follow-up were positive 5 days and 12 days, respectively, after discharge from index admission. Both recovered without serious outcomes.

INTERPRETATION

The COVID-19 pandemic altered practice patterns of gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons in the management of acute severe ulcerative colitis but was associated with similar outcomes to a historical cohort. Despite continued use of high-dose corticosteroids and biologicals, the incidence of COVID-19 within 3 months was low and not associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes.

FUNDING

None.

The effects of COVID-19 on IBD prescribing and service provision in a UK tertiary centre

BACKGROUND

To quantify the effects of COVID-19 on our inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) unit, including service provision, prescribing practices and use of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM).

METHODS

We performed a single centre retrospective observational cohort study. Data was extracted from our IBD database, electronic patient records and radiology/endoscopy reporting systems between 16/3/20-17/4/20 and the corresponding period in 2019.

RESULTS

A similar number of patients commenced biologic therapy before COVID-19 (n = 37) and during the pandemic (n = 36). Patients in the pre-COVID-19 cohort were older (median 36 vs 29 years, P = 0.009) with a longer median disease duration (9.3 vs 5.2 years, P = 0.02). During COVID-19 there was a nonsignificant increase in prescribing of vedolizumab (8/37, 22% vs 14/36, 39%, P = 0.13) and a higher proportion of patients were anti-TNF-naïve (3/17, 18% vs 18/24, 74%, P = 0.0004). There was a reduction in use of concomitant immunomodulators (22/29, 76% vs 4/34, 12%, P < 0.0001) and increased biologic use in thiopurine-naïve patients (3/37, 8% vs 15/36, 42%, P = 0.001). Use of TDM fell by 75% (240 vs 59 tests). Outpatient appointments fell by 68% and were conducted via telemedicine. MRI scanning, endoscopy, luminal surgery and inpatient numbers fell by 87%, 85%, 100% and 82% respectively. IBD Clinical Nurse Specialist and Pharmacist helpline contacts increased by 76% and 228% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed prescribing differences during COVID-19, bypassing the initiation of immunomodulators and/or anti-TNF therapy in favour of vedolizumab with a reduction in immunomodulator prescribing. We also observed a rapid reorganisation of service provision, including a shift towards telemedicine and online solutions.

COVID-19-related health anxieties and impact of specific interventions in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in the UK

OBJECTIVE

Health-related concerns brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact of specific local and national interventions have not been explored in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in the UK. We evaluated perspectives of patients with IBD on the pandemic and effectiveness of information dissemination in addressing concerns.

METHODS

We prospectively conducted a survey among patients with IBD during the COVID-19 pandemic to assess concerns, information-seeking behaviours, risk perception, compliance and effect of specific interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 228 patients were interviewed of whom 89% reported being concerned about the impact of COVID-19 on their health. Access to at least one IBD-specific clinical interaction during the pandemic (COVID-19 information letter from IBD team, interaction with IBD team or general practitioner, Crohn and Colitis UK website visit) was significantly associated with alleviating concerns (OR 2.66; 95% CI 1.35 to 5.24; p=0.005). Seeking health information solely through unofficial channels (search engines or social media) was less likely to ease concerns (OR 0.15; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.61; p=0.008). A quarter of patients disagreed with their assigned risk groups, with majority perceiving higher-risk profiles. This discordance was greatest in patients within the moderate-risk group and constituted immunosuppression use. Nearly 40% of patients had ongoing concerns with regard to their medications of whom a third felt their concerns were not addressed.

CONCLUSION

IBD-specific clinical interactions are associated with alleviation of COVID-19 health concerns. These findings have wider implications and emphasise importance of innovative solutions that facilitate effective communication with patients without overburdening current services.

React, reset and restore: Adaptation of a large inflammatory bowel disease service during COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

Healthcare organisations have had to make adaptations to reduce the impact of the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This has necessitated urgent reconfiguration within inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) services to ensure safety of patients and staff and seamless continuity of care provision.

AIM

To describe the adaptations made by a large inflammatory bowel disease service, caring for over 3,500 IBD patients, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A diary record of responses to the pandemic were logged, and meeting minutes were reviewed. Data were recorded from IBD advice lines, multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting minutes, infusion unit attendances, and electronic referral systems for the 8-week period from 9 March 2020 until 2 May 2020. Descriptive analysis was performed.

RESULTS

The IBD service at Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust (IBD Hull) instituted rapid structural and functional changes to the service. Outpatient services were suspended and substituted by virtual consultations, and inpatient services were reduced and moved to ambulatory care where possible. The delivery of biologic and immunomodulatory therapies was significantly modified to ensure patient and staff safety. There was a substantial increase in IBD advice line calls.

CONCLUSION

The rapidly evolving COVID-19 pandemic required a prompt response, regular reassessment and planning, and continues to do so. We share our experience in of the successful adaptations made to our IBD service.

Impact of COVID-19 on the diagnosis, assessment and management of children with inflammatory bowel disease in the UK: implications for practice

The assessment and management of patients with known, or suspected, paediatric inflammatory bowel disease (PIBD) has been hugely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Although current evidence of the impact of COVID-19 infection in children with PIBD has provided a degree of reassurance, there continues to be the potential for significant secondary harm caused by the changes to normal working practices and reorganisation of services. Disruption to the normal running of diagnostic and assessment procedures, such as endoscopy, has resulted in the potential for secondary harm to patients including delayed diagnosis and delay in treatment. Difficult management decisions have been made in order to minimise COVID-19 risk for this patient group while avoiding harm. Initiating and continuing immunosuppressive and biological therapies in the absence of normal surveillance and diagnostic procedures have posed many challenges. Despite this, changes to working practices, including virtual clinic appointments, home faecal calprotectin testing kits and continued intensive support from clinical nurse specialists and other members of the multidisciplinary team, have resulted in patients still receiving a high standard of care, with those who require face-to-face intervention being highlighted. These changes have the potential to revolutionise the way in which patients receive routine care in the future, with the inclusion of telemedicine increasingly attractive for stable patients. There is also the need to use lessons learnt from this pandemic to plan for a possible second wave, or future pandemics as well as implementing some permanent changes to normal working practices. In this review, we describe the diagnosis, management and direct impact of COVID-19 in paediatric patients with IBD. We summarise the guidance and describe the implemented changes, evolving evidence and the implications of this virus on paediatric patients with IBD and working practices.