Long-term follow-up in patients with coeliac disease in the pandemic-era: a view from Sheffield the NHS England national centre for adult coeliac disease.
Celiac disease
Follow up
Gluten-free diet
Journal
Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench
ISSN: 2008-2258
Titre abrégé: Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench
Pays: Iran
ID NLM: 101525875
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
20
09
2022
accepted:
20
12
2022
medline:
9
8
2023
pubmed:
9
8
2023
entrez:
9
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To explore patients' follow-up preferences. Optimal follow-up strategies for patients with coeliac disease remain a subject of debate. Research suggests patients' prefer review by dietitians with a doctor available as required. Patients with coeliac disease under review at our centre, completed a questionnaire assessing their views on what makes follow-up useful based on specific criteria. Bloods tests, symptoms review, dietary assessment, opportunity to ask questions and reassurance. Patients' preferences between follow-up with a hospital doctor, a hospital dietitian, a hospital dietitian with a doctor available, a general practitioner, no follow-up or access when needed were also evaluated. 138 adult patients completed the questionnaire, 80% of patients reported following a strict gluten free diet (mean diagnosis was 7.2 years). Overall, 60% found their follow-up to be 'very useful' valuing their review of blood tests and symptoms (71%) reassurance (60%) and opportunity to ask questions (58%). Follow-up by a dietitian with a doctor available was the most preferred option of review (p<0.001) except when compared to hospital doctor (p=0.75). Novel modalities of follow-up such as telephone and video reviews were regarded as of equal value to face-to-face appointments (65% and 62% respectively). Digital applications were significantly less preferable (38%, p<0.001). Follow-up by a dietitian with a doctor available as needed was the most preferred follow-up method. However, in this study follow-up by a dietitian with doctor available and hospital doctor alone was statistically equivalent. Many patients consider telephone and video follow-up of equal value to face-to-face reviews.
Sections du résumé
Aim
UNASSIGNED
To explore patients' follow-up preferences.
Background
UNASSIGNED
Optimal follow-up strategies for patients with coeliac disease remain a subject of debate. Research suggests patients' prefer review by dietitians with a doctor available as required.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Patients with coeliac disease under review at our centre, completed a questionnaire assessing their views on what makes follow-up useful based on specific criteria. Bloods tests, symptoms review, dietary assessment, opportunity to ask questions and reassurance. Patients' preferences between follow-up with a hospital doctor, a hospital dietitian, a hospital dietitian with a doctor available, a general practitioner, no follow-up or access when needed were also evaluated.
Results
UNASSIGNED
138 adult patients completed the questionnaire, 80% of patients reported following a strict gluten free diet (mean diagnosis was 7.2 years). Overall, 60% found their follow-up to be 'very useful' valuing their review of blood tests and symptoms (71%) reassurance (60%) and opportunity to ask questions (58%). Follow-up by a dietitian with a doctor available was the most preferred option of review (p<0.001) except when compared to hospital doctor (p=0.75). Novel modalities of follow-up such as telephone and video reviews were regarded as of equal value to face-to-face appointments (65% and 62% respectively). Digital applications were significantly less preferable (38%, p<0.001).
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Follow-up by a dietitian with a doctor available as needed was the most preferred follow-up method. However, in this study follow-up by a dietitian with doctor available and hospital doctor alone was statistically equivalent. Many patients consider telephone and video follow-up of equal value to face-to-face reviews.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37554757
doi: 10.22037/ghfbb.v16i2.2637
pmc: PMC10404824
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
158-166Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
D.S.S. receives an educational grant from Schär (a gluten-free food manufacturer). The remaining authors disclose no conflicts.
Références
World J Gastroenterol. 2021 May 28;27(20):2603-2614
pubmed: 34092978
Am J Gastroenterol. 2020 Apr;115(4):507-525
pubmed: 32022718
Mayo Clin Proc. 2019 Dec;94(12):2556-2571
pubmed: 31806106
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Oct 04;18(10):e264
pubmed: 27702738
Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2019 Mar;48(1):127-136
pubmed: 30711205
Fam Med Community Health. 2020 Aug;8(3):
pubmed: 32816942
Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2020 Jan;11(1):e00121
pubmed: 31977451
Br J Nutr. 2012 Nov 28;108(10):1884-8
pubmed: 22321199
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 Oct;12(10):580-91
pubmed: 26392070
Gastroenterology. 2017 Sep;153(3):689-701.e1
pubmed: 28545781
J Patient Exp. 2021 May 19;8:23743735211018083
pubmed: 34179445
Frontline Gastroenterol. 2019 Aug 8;11(3):235-242
pubmed: 32419915
Am J Gastroenterol. 2013 May;108(5):656-76; quiz 677
pubmed: 23609613
J Hum Nutr Diet. 2020 Dec;33(6):741-751
pubmed: 32383338
Frontline Gastroenterol. 2020 Jun 16;12(5):380-384
pubmed: 35401953
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006 Mar 15;23(6):827-31
pubmed: 16556185
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2009 Aug 15;30(4):315-30
pubmed: 19485977
Nutrients. 2021 Jan 25;13(2):
pubmed: 33503952
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2021 Apr;56(4):382-390
pubmed: 33621157
J Hum Nutr Diet. 2005 Dec;18(6):467-8
pubmed: 16351706
J Hum Nutr Diet. 2020 Dec;33(6):786-810
pubmed: 32348008
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2018 Jul;48(1):78-86
pubmed: 29733115
Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol. 2021 Jan-Dec;35:20587384211008709
pubmed: 33878915
Frontline Gastroenterol. 2019 Apr 29;11(2):93-97
pubmed: 32134411
J Hum Nutr Diet. 2007 Oct;20(5):403-11
pubmed: 17845374
Gut. 2014 Aug;63(8):1210-28
pubmed: 24917550
Gastroenterology. 2019 Mar;156(4):885-889
pubmed: 30578783
Frontline Gastroenterol. 2020 Oct 27;12(7):586-592
pubmed: 34917316
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2021 Aug;56(8):882-888
pubmed: 34057009