Chandrashekhar Thukral

Poor Documentation of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Quality Measures in Academic, Community, and Private Practice

BACKGROUND & AIMS Quality measures are used to standardize health care and monitor quality of care. In 2011, the American Gastroenterological Association established quality measures for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but there has been limited documentation of compliance from different practice settings. METHODS We reviewed charts from 367 consecutive patients with IBD seen at academic practices, 217 patients seen at community practices, and 199 patients seen at private practices for compliance with 8 outpatient measures. Records were assessed for IBD history, medications, comorbidities, and hospitalizations. We also determined the number of patient visits to gastroenterologists in the past year, whether patients had a primary care physician at the same institution, and whether they were seen by a specialist in IBD or in conjunction with a trainee, and reviewed physician demographics. A univariate and multivariate statistical analysis was performed to determine which factors were associated with compliance of all core measures. RESULTS Screening for tobacco abuse was the most frequently assessed core measure (89.6% of patients; n = 701 of 783), followed by location of IBD (80.3%; n = 629 of 783), and assessment for corticosteroid-sparing therapy (70.8%; n = 275 of 388). The least-frequently evaluated measures were pneumococcal immunization (16.7% of patients; n = 131 of 783), bone loss (25%; n = 126 of 505), and influenza immunization (28.7%; n = 225 of 783). Only 5.8% of patients (46 of 783) had all applicable core measures documented (24 in academic practice, none in clinical practice, and 22 in private practice). In the multivariate model, year of graduation from fellowship (odds ratio [OR], 2.184; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.522-3.134; P < .001), year of graduation from medical school (OR, 0.500; 95% CI, 0.352-0.709; P < .001), and total number of comorbidities (OR, 1.089; 95% CI, 1.016-1.168; P = .016) were associated with compliance with all core measures. CONCLUSIONS We found poor documentation of IBD quality measures in academic, clinical, and private gastroenterology practices. Interventions are necessary to improve reporting of quality measures.

Therapy Insight: drugs for gastrointestinal disorders in pregnant women

The management and treatment of gastrointestinal ailments in pregnant women requires special attention and expertise, since the safety of the mother, fetus and neonate remains the primary focus. Nausea and vomiting during pregnancy is common, as is symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease. Peptic ulcer disease occurs less frequently and with fewer complications. Gastroenterologists and obstetricians should be familiar with safe treatment options for these conditions, because they can profoundly impair the quality of life of pregnant women. During pregnancy, constipation can develop de novo, or chronic constipation can increase in severity. Given the array of therapies for constipation, physicians must apprise themselves of drugs that are safe for both mother and fetus. Management of acute, self-limited diarrhea should focus on supportive therapy, dietary changes and maintenance of hydration. Treatment of chronic diarrhea should be considered in the context of therapy for the underlying disorder. Inflammatory bowel disease and irritable bowel syndrome present a unique therapeutic challenge—to control the disease while minimizing toxicity to the fetus and mother. Initiation and alteration of medical therapy for gastrointestinal disorders during pregnancy must be undertaken after discussion with the patients obstetrician.

Anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy for ulcerative colitis : Evidence to date

Infliximab, the chimeric monoclonal antibody directed against tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α, has profoundly changed therapy for Crohn’s disease (CD). However, for ulcerative colitis (UC), before the publication of ACT 1 and ACT 2 (Active Ulcerative Colitis Trials 1 and 2), there were only a few open-label and controlled trials that evaluated the role of infliximab in the treatment of UC. Results from these earlier studies were equivocal and ambiguous. However, the ACT 1 and ACT 2 trials were large, randomised and placebo-controlled, and have shown that infliximab is significantly more efficacious than placebo in treating both corticosteroid-responsive and -refractory moderate to severe UC. Data from these two studies showed that in patients with moderate to severe UC, treatment with infliximab (5 and 10 mg/kg), compared with placebo, led to significantly higher rates of clinical response, clinical remission and mucosal healing. However, a significant proportion of patients who were receiving oral corticosteroids at the start of the trials, remained on corticosteroids despite infliximab therapy. Additionally, the safety profile of the drug was found to be similar to what has been reported in clinical studies of infliximab in patients with CD.On the basis of currently available data, we use infliximab as a remission-inducing agent in patients who have moderate to severe UC and are either refractory to or intolerant of mesalazine (5-ASA) products and immunomodulators. Moreover, infliximab seems to be a reasonable therapeutic modality for remission maintenance in those patients with UC in whom mesalazine products and immunomodulators have failed. Although data are limited, infliximab may be considered as a remission-inducing agent in patients with moderate to severe UC which is refractory to oral corticosteroids. However, the role of infliximab in the treatment of UC patients who are dependent on oral corticosteroids is still unclear and, therefore, should be considered only in patients who cannot be successfully transitioned to or are intolerant of oral immunomodulators. Furthermore, infliximab may be an alternative to ciclosporin (cyclosporin) in hospitalised patients with severe to moderately severe but not fulminant UC who do not respond to intravenous corticosteroids. At present, there is insufficient evidence to advocate using infliximab as a first-line agent for UC patients with mild or moderate to severe disease. Future randomised, controlled trials with clearly defined patient populations should further help to clarify the definitive role of infliximab in the therapeutic scheme for UC.

Heightened NTPDase-1/CD39 expression and angiogenesis in radiation proctitis

Radiation proctitis is an inflammatory process associated with persistent and refractory lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Purinergic signaling regulates hemostasis, inflammation, and angiogenesis. For example, CD39, the vascular ectonucleotidase, blocks platelet activation and is required for angiogenesis. Whether CD39 expression is affected by radiation injury is unknown. The aim of this work was to study CD39 expression patterns after clinical radiation injury to the rectum. We prospectively enrolled eight patients with radiation proctitis and five gender-matched controls. Biopsies were taken from normal-appearing rectal mucosa of controls and from the normal sigmoid and abnormal rectum of patients. Expression patterns of CD39, P2Y2 receptor, CD31, CD61 integrin, and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 were examined by immunostaining; levels of CD39 were further evaluated by Western blots. Chronic inflammatory lesions of radiation proctitis were associated with heightened levels of angiogenesis. Immunohistochemical stains showed increased vascular expression of CD39, as confirmed by Western blots. CD39 was co-localized with vascular endothelial markers CD31 and CD61 integrin, as well as expressed by stromal tissues. Development of neovasculature and associated CD39 expression in radiation proctitis may be associated with the chronic, refractory bleeding observed in this condition.

Results of a Community-based, Randomized Study Comparing a Clear Liquid Diet With a Low-residue Diet Using a Magnesium Citrate Preparation for Screening and Surveillance Colonoscopies

Background: Current bowel preparations for colonoscopy include a clear liquid diet (CLD) along with consumption of a laxative. This dietary restriction along with large volume bowel preparations are barriers to compliance and willingness among patients in scheduling screening examinations. The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of a low-volume split dose magnesium citrate bowel preparation in patients on a low-residue diet (LRD) with those on a CLD. Methods: In this single center, single blinded, randomized controlled trial, patients scheduled for outpatient colonoscopies were assigned to either a CLD or a LRD 1 day before the examination. Both groups received a split dose magnesium citrate preparation. The quality of the preparation was rated using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Patient satisfaction and side effects were evaluated using a questionnaire. Results: We were unable to detect a significant difference in the BBPS scores between the LRD and CLD groups (P=0.581). A significantly higher percentage of patients in the LRD group rated the diet as easy compared with the CLD group (P<0.001). Satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the LRD group, compared with the CLD group (P<0.001). The side effect profiles of both arms were similar. Conclusions: There was no significant difference between LRD and CLD in patients using a magnesium citrate bowel preparation for screening and surveillance colonoscopies. Patient satisfaction scores were higher with a LRD compared with a CLD. We believe the LRD should be the recommended diet in patients using a standard bowel preparation for screening and surveillance colonoscopy.