ArticleInflammatory intestinal diseases2019
Real-World Data on Topical Therapies and Annual Health Resource Utilization in Hospitalized Swiss Patients with Ulcerative Colitis.
Article in Inflammatory intestinal diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of twice-daily budesonide foam administration on early clinical response and endoscopic remission in patients with ulcerative colitis: a post hoc analysis.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024Article
- May ChatGPT be a tool producing medical information for common inflammatory bowel disease patients' questions? An evidence-controlled analysis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTopical 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.
methodsThis 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.
resultsOf 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.
conclusionsTopical 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.