Novel Approaches Identifying Relevant Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases—LISTEN 1

Abstract

\n \n \n Several patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have been established and are widely used in the assessment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, it has never been investigated which PRO items are experienced by and are considered most relevant for IBD patients.\n \n \n \n A review of IBD-related disease scores by a steering committee led to the identification of relevant PRO questions and assignment to 16 different PRO categories (9 symptoms and 7 impacts) that characterize patient’s disease burden. In a cross-sectional study, a digital patient survey was carried out to determine the self-reported experience by multiple response, the relevance of these PRO categories by pairwise comparison and the suitability of the respective questions and answer possibilities by yes-or-no-question.\n \n \n \n Sixty patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) (56.7% women; mean age 40.6 years; mean disease duration 12.4 years) and 60 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) (51.7% women; mean age 37.3 years; mean disease duration 9.0 years) participated in the patient survey. All predefined symptoms and impacts, with the exception of nausea, were experienced by at least 50% of patients. Stool urgency and pain were rated the 2 most important symptoms in CD patients with similar ratings for relevance. Stool urgency was also the most important symptom in patients with UC, followed by stool frequency. Differences in self-reported experience between CD and UC patients were seen for the symptoms of rectal bleeding, pain, and nausea. Most important impact of symptoms in both patient groups were general wellbeing followed by social activities, while sexual activity was the least relevant impact category.\n \n \n \n Stool urgency was the most relevant and most self-reported symptom for both CD and UC. Relevance and self-reported experience of pain and rectal bleeding differed between the 2 diseases. Therefore, the future collection of PROs should take these disease specificities into consideration.\n