Interactive Inflammatory Bowel Disease Biologics Decision Aid Does Not Improve Patient Outcomes Over Static Education: Results From a Randomized Trial - PubMed (original) (raw)

Randomized Controlled Trial

. 2022 Sep 1;117(9):1508-1518.

doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001866. Epub 2022 Jun 10.

Welmoed K van Deen 3, Michelle Chen 4, Rebecca Gale 2, Stéphanie Sidorkiewicz 5, So Yung Choi 6, Nirupama Bonthala 1 7, Christina Ha 8, Gaurav Syal 1 7, Taylor Dupuy 2, Xiaoyu Liu 2, Gil Y Melmed 1 7, Brennan M R Spiegel 1 2

Affiliations

Randomized Controlled Trial

Interactive Inflammatory Bowel Disease Biologics Decision Aid Does Not Improve Patient Outcomes Over Static Education: Results From a Randomized Trial

Christopher V Almario et al. Am J Gastroenterol. 2022.

Abstract

Introduction: To support shared decision-making (SDM) between patients and providers surrounding biologic treatments, we created IBD&me ( ibdandme.org )-a freely available, unbranded, interactive decision aid. We performed a multicenter comparative effectiveness trial comparing the impact of IBD&me on SDM vs a biologics fact sheet developed by the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation.

Methods: We enrolled patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) being seen at a clinic within IBD Qorus-a multicenter adult IBD learning health system-between March 5, 2019, and May 14, 2021. Eligible patients included those with recent IBD-related symptoms who reported that they wanted to discuss biologics with their provider during their upcoming visit. Patients were randomized 1:1 using stratified block randomization and received an e-mail 1 week before their visit inviting them to review either IBD&me or a fact sheet. The primary outcome was patient perception of SDM as measured by the 9-Item SDM Questionnaire (0-100 scale; higher = better); the Student t test was used to compare outcomes between arms.

Results: Overall, 152 patients were randomized (biologics fact sheet 75, IBD&me 77); most patients had Crohn's disease (66.4%) and were biologic-experienced (82.9%). No differences were seen between groups regarding SDM (fact sheet 72.6 ± 25.6, IBD&me 75.0 ± 20.8; P = .57). Most patients stated they would be likely to recommend the fact sheet (79.6%) or IBD&me (84.9%; P = .48) to another patient with IBD.

Discussion: No differences in outcomes were seen between IBD&me and the biologics fact sheet in this comparative effectiveness study; patients reported high satisfaction with both resources. Further study, particularly among biologic naïve patients, is needed to determine the utility of interactive components to IBD decision aids.

Copyright © 2022 by The American College of Gastroenterology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

POTENTIAL COMPETING INTERESTS:

• Christopher V. Almario, MD, MSHPM—Consultant: Arena Pharmaceuticals. Research support: funding from the Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation for work related to the IBD Qorus™ Learning Health System.

• Welmoed K. van Deen, PhD, MD—Consultant: Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation. Research support: funding from the Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation for work related to the IBD Qorus™ Learning Health System.

• Michelle Chen, MPH—No relevant disclosures to report.

• Rebecca Gale, MPH—No relevant disclosures to report.

• Stéphanie Sidorkiewicz, MD, PhD—No relevant disclosures to report.

• So Yung Choi, MS—No relevant disclosures to report.

• Nirupama Bonthala, MD—No relevant disclosures to report.

• Christina Ha, MD—Advisory board: Abbvie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, Lilly, InDex Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Pfizer, Takeda; Consultant: Abbvie, Genentech, Janssen; Speakers bureau: Abbvie; Research support: Pfizer.

• Gaurav Syal, MD, MHDS—Research support: Pfizer Independent Grants for Learning & Change Program.

• Taylor Dupuy, BS—No relevant disclosures to report.

• Xiaoyu Liu, MPH—No relevant disclosures to report.

• Gil Y. Melmed, MD, MS—Consultant: Abbvie, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Meyers-Squibb/Celgene, Entasis, Janssen, Medtronic, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Takeda, Techlab. Research support: Pfizer Independent Grants for Learning & Change Program.

• Brennan M.R. Spiegel, MD, MSHS—Research support: Pfizer Independent Grants for Learning & Change Program.

Figures

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1.

Sample IBD&me conjoint analysis exercise and personalized report. (A) The conjoint analysis exercises show patients side-by-side comparisons of hypothetical biologic medications and asks respondents to select the preferred profile. In the example, a patient weighs how the medicine is given with the chances of symptom improvement with taking the medicine. (B) The personalized report rank orders the biologic medication attributes that were most important to the patient when selecting among the different options in the conjoint analysis exercises. Here, mode of administration was the most important factor in the patient’s decision making.

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2.

CONSORT flow diagram. IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; ITT, intention-to-treat.

References

    1. Dassopoulos T, Cohen RD, Scherl EJ, et al. Ulcerative colitis care pathway. Gastroenterology 2015;149:238–45. -PubMed
    1. Sandborn WJ. Crohn’s disease evaluation and treatment: clinical decision tool. Gastroenterology 2014;147:702–5. -PubMed
    1. Feuerstein JD, Ho EY, Shmidt E, et al. AGA clinical practice guidelines on the medical management of moderate to severe luminal and perianal fistulizing Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 2021;160:2496–2508. -PMC -PubMed
    1. Feuerstein JD, Isaacs KL, Schneider Y, et al. AGA clinical practice guidelines on the management of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 2020;158:1450–1461. -PMC -PubMed
    1. Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Isaacs KL, et al. ACG clinical guideline: management of Crohn’s disease in adults. Am J Gastroenterol 2018;113:481–517. -PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources