Caroline Baehler1, Beat Brüngger1, Eva Blozik1,2, Stephan R Vavricka3,4, Alain M Schoepfer5. 1. Department of Health Sciences, Helsana Insurance Group, Zurich, Switzerland. 2. Department of Medicine, University Medical Centre Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany. 3. Center for Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Zurich, Switzerland. 4. Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 5. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois/CHUV and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Topical treatment with aminosalicylates and/or budesonide was shown to be highly effective in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), while reducing the likelihood of systemic adverse effects. However, previous research has shown that topical treatment is clearly underused. We aimed to evaluate the use of topical therapy in the real-world setting. METHODS: This is an observational study based on claims data of 201 Swiss adult patients who were hospitalized for UC between 2012 and 2014 and who were then followed for 1 year. A variety of factors presumably associated with topical treatment were examined. Annual health care utilization (UC-related medications, diagnostic procedures, consultations, and rehospitalizations) of patients with versus without topical therapy was compared. RESULTS: Of the 201 hospitalized UC patients, 82 (40.8%) were treated with topical 5-acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and/or topical rectal steroids. The main factors significantly and positively associated with receiving topical treatment were the use of topical treatment in the year prior to the hospitalization, receiving oral 5-ASA, and living in an urban area. The mode of administration was further related to the language area. Patients with topical therapy significantly more often received other UC-related medications, such as combinations with systemic steroids. They significantly more often underwent colonoscopies and calprotectin measurements, and more often consulted a gastroenterologist in the follow-up, while there was no significant difference regarding rehospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Topical treatment is underused in patients with UC, which stands in contrast to the current European Crohn's and Colitis Organization guidelines. Patients' preferences and considerations need to be taken into account when prescribing medical therapy.
OBJECTIVES: Topical treatment with aminosalicylates and/or budesonide was shown to be highly effective in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), while reducing the likelihood of systemic adverse effects. However, previous research has shown that topical treatment is clearly underused. We aimed to evaluate the use of topical therapy in the real-world setting. METHODS: This is an observational study based on claims data of 201 Swiss adult patients who were hospitalized for UC between 2012 and 2014 and who were then followed for 1 year. A variety of factors presumably associated with topical treatment were examined. Annual health care utilization (UC-related medications, diagnostic procedures, consultations, and rehospitalizations) of patients with versus without topical therapy was compared. RESULTS: Of the 201 hospitalized UC patients, 82 (40.8%) were treated with topical 5-acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and/or topical rectal steroids. The main factors significantly and positively associated with receiving topical treatment were the use of topical treatment in the year prior to the hospitalization, receiving oral 5-ASA, and living in an urban area. The mode of administration was further related to the language area. Patients with topical therapy significantly more often received other UC-related medications, such as combinations with systemic steroids. They significantly more often underwent colonoscopies and calprotectin measurements, and more often consulted a gastroenterologist in the follow-up, while there was no significant difference regarding rehospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Topical treatment is underused in patients with UC, which stands in contrast to the current European Crohn's and Colitis Organization guidelines. Patients' preferences and considerations need to be taken into account when prescribing medical therapy.
Authors: Fernando Magro; Andreia Rodrigues; Ana Isabel Vieira; Francisco Portela; Isabelle Cremers; José Cotter; Luis Correia; Maria Antónia Duarte; Maria Lourdes Tavares; Paula Lago; Paula Ministro; Paula Peixe; Susana Lopes; Elizabeth Benito Garcia Journal: Inflamm Bowel Dis Date: 2011-07-26 Impact factor: 5.325
Authors: Siddharth Singh; James A Proudfoot; Parambir S Dulai; Vipul Jairath; Mathurin Fumery; Ronghui Xu; Brian G Feagan; William J Sandborn Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2018-06-21 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: P Gionchetti; F Rizzello; A Venturi; M Ferretti; C Brignola; M Miglioli; M Campieri Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 1998-01 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Ekaterina Safroneeva; Stephan R Vavricka; Nicolas Fournier; Alex Straumann; Gerhard Rogler; Alain M Schoepfer Journal: Inflamm Bowel Dis Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 5.325
Authors: Isabelle Cleynen; Gabrielle Boucher; Luke Jostins; L Philip Schumm; Sebastian Zeissig; Tariq Ahmad; Vibeke Andersen; Jane M Andrews; Vito Annese; Stephan Brand; Steven R Brant; Judy H Cho; Mark J Daly; Marla Dubinsky; Richard H Duerr; Lynnette R Ferguson; Andre Franke; Richard B Gearry; Philippe Goyette; Hakon Hakonarson; Jonas Halfvarson; Johannes R Hov; Hailang Huang; Nicholas A Kennedy; Limas Kupcinskas; Ian C Lawrance; James C Lee; Jack Satsangi; Stephan Schreiber; Emilie Théâtre; Andrea E van der Meulen-de Jong; Rinse K Weersma; David C Wilson; Miles Parkes; Severine Vermeire; John D Rioux; John Mansfield; Mark S Silverberg; Graham Radford-Smith; Dermot P B McGovern; Jeffrey C Barrett; Charlie W Lees Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-10-18 Impact factor: 202.731