ArticleBMJ open gastroenterology2025
Quality of life and lived experience of patients with short bowel syndrome treated with teduglutide and weaning off home parenteral nutrition: a qualitative analysis of patient diaries.
Article in BMJ open gastroenterology, 2025. 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.
- National Prescribing Patterns in Stoma Care Across the United Kingdom: A Prescription Cost Analysis with Health Policy Implications.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to explore the lived experiences and coping strategies of patients with short bowel syndrome (SBS) prescribed teduglutide and weaning off home parenteral nutrition (HPN), and to compare the quality of life (QOL) of these patients to patients with SBS but not prescribed teduglutide.
methodsA qualitative study was conducted, with patients recruited from a specialist HPN clinic. Participants completed handwritten semi-structured daily diaries for 6 weeks and a validated Home Parenteral Nutrition-Quality of Life (HPN-QOL) paper-based questionnaire as part of what aimed to be a mixed methods cross-tracks study. Participants were age-matched with patients with SBS receiving HPN but not prescribed teduglutide, and these 'controls' also completed the HPN-QOL questionnaire. Data analysis involved qualitative analysis of diary entries using grounded theory methodology and descriptive analysis of HPN-QOL questionnaire responses.
resultsFive participants completed the study and were matched with four 'controls'. All participants and 'controls' reported a high QOL with no differences observed between patients prescribed and not prescribed teduglutide. Qualitative analysis revealed that participants engaged in iterative cycles of problem-focused action and emotion-focused coping strategies to manage their condition and wean off parenteral nutrition (PN). Key subthemes included polyphagia and pleomorphism in diet, fatigue-related emotional distress and positive reframing using an objective scientific lens. Decisional regret was absent, participants agreed that treatment with teduglutide was the right choice for them, despite its challenges. Their goal of independence from PN was the main motivating factor.
conclusionThis study provides valuable insights into the lived experiences and coping strategies of patients with SBS prescribed teduglutide to wean off PN. The findings underscore the importance of healthcare teams understanding these everyday challenges to facilitate shared decision-making and tailor care plans. Further research is needed to explore the long-term impact of teduglutide on QOL, including the validation of tools to screen for fatigue-related emotional distress and the development of targeted interventions to support patients during the weaning process.
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.