TY - JOUR
T1 - Coeliac disease screening is suboptimal in a tertiary gastroenterology setting
AU - Iskandar, Heba
AU - Gray, Darrell M.
AU - Vu, Hongha
AU - Mirza, Faiz
AU - Rude, Mary Katherine
AU - Regan, Kara
AU - Abdalla, Adil
AU - Gaddam, Srinivas
AU - Almaskeen, Sami
AU - Mello, Michael
AU - Marquez, Evelyn
AU - Meyer, Claire
AU - Bolkhir, Ahmed
AU - Kanuri, Navya
AU - Sayuk, Gregory
AU - Gyawali, C. Prakash
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved.
PY - 2017/8/1
Y1 - 2017/8/1
N2 - Background and aims Coeliac disease (CD) is widely prevalent in North America, but case-finding techniques currently used may not be adequate for patient identification. We aimed to determine the adequacy of CD screening in an academic gastroenterology (GI) practice. Methods Consecutive initial visits to a tertiary academic GI practice were surveyed over a 3-month period as a fellow-initiated quality improvement project. All electronic records were reviewed to look for indications for CD screening according to published guidelines. The timing of screening was noted (before or after referral), as well as the screening method (serology or biopsy). Data were analysed to compare CD screening practices across subspecialty clinics. Results 616 consecutive patients (49±0.6 years, range 16-87 years, 58.5% females, 94% Caucasian) fulfilled inclusion criteria. CD testing was indicated in 336 (54.5%), but performed in only 145 (43.2%). The need for CD screening was highest in luminal GI and inflammatory bowel disease clinics, followed by biliary and hepatology clinics (p<0.0001); CD screening rate was highest in the luminal GI clinic (p=0.002). Of 145 patients screened, 4 patients (2.4%) had serology consistent with CD, of which 2 were proven by duodenal biopsy. Using this proportion, an additional 5 patients might have been diagnosed in 191 untested patients with indications for CD screening. Conclusions More than 50% of patients in a tertiary GI clinic have indications for CD screening, but <50% of indicated cases are screened. Case-finding techniques therefore are suboptimal, constituting a gap in patient care and an important target for future quality improvement initiatives.
AB - Background and aims Coeliac disease (CD) is widely prevalent in North America, but case-finding techniques currently used may not be adequate for patient identification. We aimed to determine the adequacy of CD screening in an academic gastroenterology (GI) practice. Methods Consecutive initial visits to a tertiary academic GI practice were surveyed over a 3-month period as a fellow-initiated quality improvement project. All electronic records were reviewed to look for indications for CD screening according to published guidelines. The timing of screening was noted (before or after referral), as well as the screening method (serology or biopsy). Data were analysed to compare CD screening practices across subspecialty clinics. Results 616 consecutive patients (49±0.6 years, range 16-87 years, 58.5% females, 94% Caucasian) fulfilled inclusion criteria. CD testing was indicated in 336 (54.5%), but performed in only 145 (43.2%). The need for CD screening was highest in luminal GI and inflammatory bowel disease clinics, followed by biliary and hepatology clinics (p<0.0001); CD screening rate was highest in the luminal GI clinic (p=0.002). Of 145 patients screened, 4 patients (2.4%) had serology consistent with CD, of which 2 were proven by duodenal biopsy. Using this proportion, an additional 5 patients might have been diagnosed in 191 untested patients with indications for CD screening. Conclusions More than 50% of patients in a tertiary GI clinic have indications for CD screening, but <50% of indicated cases are screened. Case-finding techniques therefore are suboptimal, constituting a gap in patient care and an important target for future quality improvement initiatives.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026627280&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/postgradmedj-2016-134005
DO - 10.1136/postgradmedj-2016-134005
M3 - Article
C2 - 28069744
AN - SCOPUS:85026627280
SN - 0032-5473
VL - 93
SP - 472
EP - 475
JO - Postgraduate Medical Journal
JF - Postgraduate Medical Journal
IS - 1102
ER -