Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) prefer oral tablets over other modes of medicine administration

ABSTRACT

Objectives: With increasing treatment choices for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), patients’ preferences should be considered to limit non-adherence. We explored patients’ preferences for route, form and frequency of medication administration, and factors influencing these choices.

Methods: Patients rated acceptability of different forms of medication on 10-point Likert scales and preferences for highest acceptable frequency.

Results: Of 298 patients significantly more found tablets (91%) to be highly acceptable compared to granules (64%), infusions (33%) and subcutaneous injections (34%; p < 0.0001). The acceptable frequency for tablets was considered as daily by 63.5% and several times daily by 32.3%. Participants preferred nurse delivered over self-administered injections (median score 8 vs 5, p < 0.0001) and hospital-based infusions over infusions at home (median score 7 vs 5, p = 0.001). Patients with previous or current anti-TNF exposure were more accepting of self-administered injections (50.5% vs 23.3% anti-TNF naive; p < 0.001), more accepting of home based infusions (43.7% vs 28.0%; p = 0.001) and more accepting of hospital-based infusions (57.2% vs 37.8%; p = 0.02).

Conclusion: Most patients with IBD prefer tablets. Those patients who already experienced biological agents, had a high level of acceptance for subcutaneous and intravenous forms of medication.

KEYWORDS:

• Ulcerative colitis
• Crohn’s disease
• inflammatory bowel disease
• adherence
• medication

Declaration of interest

CPS has received unrestricted research grants from Janssen and AbbVie, has provided consultancy to Warner Chilcott, Dr Falk, AbbVie, Takeda, Fresenius Kabi and Janssen, and had speaker arrangements with Janssen, Dr Falk, AbbVie, Pfizer and Takeda. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.

Reviewer disclosures

Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.

Author contributions statement

JC, JK and CPS collected the data. DD analysed the data. All authors interpreted the results. DD and CPS wrote the draft manuscript. DG, JC and JK critically reviewed the manuscript.

Supplemental material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed here.

Additional information

Funding

This paper was funded by AbbVie via an unrestricted research grant. AbbVie was not involved in the conduct and analysis of the study, nor the development or review of the manuscript with the authors. This manuscript reflects the opinions of the authors. The authors determined the final content, and all authors read and approved the final manuscript.