ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology
Cross-sectional analysis of patient phone calls to an inflammatory bowel disease clinic.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Advice Lines: A Scoping Review.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2025Article
- One for all or all for one? An integrative review of research on frequent callers.PEC innovation · 2022Article
- Telephone nurses' perceived stress, self-efficacy and empathy in their work with frequent callers.Nursing open · 2022Article
- Inflammatory bowel disease nurse specialists for patients on biological therapies: a nationwide Italian survey.Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) require close follow up and frequently utilize healthcare services. We aimed to identify the main reasons that prompted patient calls to gastroenterology providers and further characterize the "frequent callers".
methodsThis retrospective cross-sectional study included all phone calls registered in medical records of IBD patients during 2012. Predictive variables included demographics, psychiatric history, IBD phenotype, disease complications and medical therapies. Primary outcome was the reason for call (symptoms, medication refill, procedures and appointment issues). Secondary outcome was the frequency of changes in management prompted by the call.
results209 patients participated in 526 calls. The mean number of calls per patient was 2.5 (range 0-27); 49 (23.4%) patients met the criterion of "frequent caller". Frequent callers made or received 75.9% of all calls. Crohn's disease, anxiety, extra-intestinal manifestations and high sedimentation rate were significantly associated with higher call volume. 85.7% of frequent callers had at least one call that prompted a therapeutic intervention, compared to 18.9% of non-frequent callers (P<0.001). The most common interventions were ordering laboratory or imaging studies (15.4%), dose adjustments (12.1%), changes in medication class (8.4%), and expediting clinic visits (8.4%).
conclusionMost phone calls originated from a minority of patients. Repeated calling by the same patient and new onset of gastrointestinal (GI) and non-GI symptoms were important factors predicting the order of diagnostic modalities or therapeutic changes in care. Triaging calls to IBD healthcare providers for patients more likely to require a change in management may improve healthcare delivery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26126710PMC4480173W2131189849What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.