PATTERNS AND ASSOCIATED FACTORS OF OBJECTIVE INFLAMMATION ASSESSMENT TO TREAT-TO-TARGET: DATA FROM THE IBD QORUS COLLABORATIVE
Thien-Bao Nguyen,Corey Siegel,Gil Melmed,Siddharth Singh,Sarah Harvey,Ridhima Oberai,Jason Hou,David Fudman
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ibd/izae020.050
2024-01-25
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
Abstract:Abstract BACKGROUND A Treat-to-Target (T2T) strategy for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) improves clinical outcomes. The cornerstone of T2T is the routine assessment of objective markers of inflammation to determine treatment efficacy. Despite this, objective testing is often delayed or not performed. This study aims to describe patterns and associated factors of intended assessment of objective markers of inflammation for patients with IBD within the multicenter quality improvement collaborative, IBD Qorus. METHODS Patient and provider survey data from IBD Qorus were prospectively collected from 6/2021 to 10/2022 across 35 academic and community practices during routine clinical care visits. Patients with unknown status of mucosal healing were excluded. The primary outcome of "timely assessment" was defined as provider-reported intent to obtain fecal calprotectin (FC), imaging, or endoscopy within 12 months. Factors associated with the primary outcome were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression, adjusting for age, gender, IBD type, and clinical factors. RESULTS 4,831 encounter-level surveys from the study period were included for analysis. In 73.9% of encounters, providers reported an intent to assess inflammation within the next 6 months. Of these, 77.1% planned to use FC and 57.7% imaging or endoscopy. 89.3% of visits noted an intent to assess inflammation within 12 months. Providers reported in 29.8% of encounters that patients declined FC and in 8.3% that imaging or endoscopy were declined. In the primary univariate analysis, intent for timely assessment was associated with ulcerative colitis (UC), recent emergency department visit or hospitalization, lack of clinical remission, mild Provider Global Assessment, current steroid use, lack of immunomodulator use, lack of steroid-free mucosal healing, care at an academic site, and intent to change therapy. On multivariate analyses, UC (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.11-1.71), steroid use (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-4.6), and plans to change therapy (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.2-2.9) remained significantly associated with higher odds of timely assessment. In contrast, steroid-free mucosal healing (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.41-0.66) and care in community practice (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51-0.77) remained significantly associated with lower odds of timely assessment. CONCLUSION In IBD Qorus, there is a strong intent to assess objective markers of inflammation. However, lower odds of intended assessment were found among patients with Crohn’s, patients in steroid-free mucosal healing, and those receiving care in community practice, revealing potential care gaps. Interestingly, providers frequently reported that patients declined FC testing, and declined this at higher rates than that for endoscopy or imaging. This study identifies potential areas to improve testing for inflammation under a T2T strategy.
gastroenterology & hepatology