Background: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a range of complex disorders that imposes a high burden on patients' quality of life and on available health resources. Only 50% of those with this disease appear to be satisfied with the treatment methods. Therefore, this has a negative effect on their willingness to comply with treatment. Objective: This study examined whether patients are more satisfied when they and their doctors agree on how much of their management decisions should be shared. Participants: A nationwide online survey of Japanese patients in treatment for IBD yielded 1,068 respondents. Methods: A scoring system to match patients' preference for shared decision-making and their actual involvement in their treatment decisions was devised. To assess factors that were associated with treatment satisfaction, univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed. Results: We found a clear correlation between the extent to which patients and their doctors agreed on decision-sharing and patients' overall satisfaction with their treatment. An excellent fit increased the odds ratio of being satisfied with the treatment by 16.48 (8.31-32.69). Conclusions: Physicians should expect best patient compliance when they and their patients are in agreement with the extent to which treatment decisions are shared. This in turn maximizes the likelihood of successful treatment outcome.

Keywords:
Inflammatory bowel disease, Treatment satisfaction, Japan
1.
Carter MJ, Lobo AJ, Travis SP: Guidelines for the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults. Gut 2004;53(suppl 5):V1-V16.
2.
De Groof EJ, Rossen NG, van Rhijn BD, Karregat EP, Boonstra K, Hageman I, Bennebroek Evertsz F, Kingma PJ, Naber AH, van den Brande JH, et al: Burden of disease and increasing prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease in a population-based cohort in the Netherlands. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016;28:1065-1072.
3.
Bernstein CN, Kraut A, Blanchard JF, Rawsthorne P, Yu N, Walld R: The relationship between inflammatory bowel disease and socioeconomic variables. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:2117-2125.
4.
Matsumoto T, Yanai S, Toya Y, Ueno M, Nakamura S: Internet-orientated Assessment of QOL and actual treatment status in Japanese patients with inflammatory bowel disease: the 3I survey. J Crohns Colitis 2015;9:477-482.
5.
LeBlanc K, Mosli MH, Parker CE, MacDonald JK: The impact of biological interventions for ulcerative colitis on health-related quality of life. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015;9:CD008655.
6.
Holdam A, Bager P, Dahlerup J: Biological therapy increases the health-related quality of life in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in a clinical setting. Scand J Gastroenterol 2016;51:706-711.
7.
Peyrin-Biroulet L, Van Assche G, Sturm A, Gisbert JP, Gaya DR, Bokemeyer B, Mantzaris GJ, Armuzzi A, Sebastian S, Lara N, et al: Treatment satisfaction, preferences and perception gaps between patients and physicians in the ulcerative colitis CARES study: a real world-based study. Dig Liver Dis 2016;48:601-607.
8.
Ueno F, Nakayama Y, Hagiwara E, Kurimoto S, Hibi T: Impact of inflammatory bowel disease on Japanese patients' quality of life: results of a patient questionnaire survey. J Gastroenterol 2016, Epub ahead of print.
9.
Lindhiem O, Bennett CB, Trentacosta CJ, McLear C: Client preferences affect treatment satisfaction, completion, and clinical outcome: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev 2014;34:506-517.
10.
Gill L, White L: A critical review of patient satisfaction. Leadersh Health Serv 2009;22:8-19.
11.
Pascoe GC: Patient satisfaction in primary health care: a literature review and analysis. Eval Program Plann 1983;6:185-210.
12.
Heidegger T, Saal D, Nuebling M: Patient satisfaction with anaesthesia care: what is patient satisfaction, how should it be measured, and what is the evidence for assuring high patient satisfaction. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2006;20:331-346.
13.
Baars JE, Markus T, Kuipers EJ, van der Woude CJ: Patients' preferences regarding shared decision-making in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: results from a patient-empowerment study. Digestion 2010;81:113-119.
14.
Hendrickson BA, Gokhale R, Cho JH: Clinical aspects and pathophysiology of inflammatory bowel disease. Clin Microbiol Rev 2002;15:79-94.
15.
Ishige T, Tomomasa T, Takebayashi T, Asakura K, Watanabe M, Suzuki T, Miyazawa R, Arakawa H: Inflammatory bowel disease in children: epidemiological analysis of the nationwide IBD registry in Japan. J Gastroenterol 2010;45:911-917.
16.
Siegel CA, Lofland JH, Naim A, Gollins J, Walls DM, Rudder LE, Reynolds C: Novel statistical approach to determine inflammatory bowel disease: patients' perspectives on shared decision making. Patient 2016;9:79-89.
17.
Tambuyzer E, Van Audenhove C: Is perceived patient involvement in mental health care associated with satisfaction and empowerment? Health Expect 2015;18:516-526.
18.
Hölzel LP, Kriston L, Härter M: Patient preference for involvement, experienced involvement, decisional conflict, and satisfaction with physician: a structural equation model test. BMC Health Serv Res 2013;13:231.
19.
Renzi C, Abeni D, Picardi A, Agostini E, Melchi CF, Pasquini P, Puddu P, Braga M: Factors associated with patient satisfaction with care among dermatological outpatients. Br J Dermatol 2001;145:617-623.
20.
Kraska R, Weigand M, Geraedts M: Associations between hospital characteristics and patient satisfaction in Germany. Health Expect 2016, Epub ahead of print.
21.
Umar N, Schaarschmidt M, Schmieder A, Peitsch WK, Schöllgen I, Terris DD: Matching physicians' treatment recommendations to patients' treatment preferences is associated with improvement in treatment satisfaction. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2013;27:763-770.
22.
Al-Jabi SW, Zyoud SH, Sweileh WM, Wildali AH, Saleem HM, Aysa HA, Badwan MA, Awang R: Relationship of treatment satisfaction to health-related quality of life: findings from a cross-sectional survey among hypertensive patients in Palestine. Health Expect 2015;18:3336-3348.
23.
Luecke RW, Rosselli V, Moss JM: The economic ramifications of “client” dissatisfaction. Group Pract J 1991:8-18.
24.
Zgierska A, Rabago D, Miller MM: Impact of patient satisfaction ratings on physicians and clinical care. Patient Prefer Adherence 2014;8:437-446.
25.
Poulos GA, Brodell RT, Mostow EN: Improving quality and patient satisfaction in dermatology office practice. Arch Dermatol 2008;144:263-265.
26.
Dubina M ONJ, Feldman SR: Effect of patient satisfaction on outcomes of care. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2009;9:393-395.
27.
Schmitt J, Csötönyi F, Bauer A, Meurer M: Determinants of treatment goals and satisfaction of patients with atopic eczema. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 2008;6:458-465.
28.
Anderson RT, Camacho FT, Balkrishnan R: Willing to wait? The influence of patient wait time on satisfaction with primary care. BMC Health Serv Res 2007;7:31.
29.
Paddison CA, Abel GA, Roland MO, Elliott MN, Lyratzopoulos G, Campbell JL: Drivers of overall satisfaction with primary care: evidence from the English general practice patient survey. Health Expect 2015;18:1081-1092.
30.
Scholl I, Koelewijn-van Loon M, Sepucha K, Elwyn G, Légaré F, Härter M, Dirmaier J: Measurement of shared decision making - a review of instruments. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 2011;105:313-324.
31.
de Haes H, Bensing J: Endpoints in medical communication research, proposing a framework of functions and outcomes. Patient Educ Couns 2009;74:287-294.
© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel
2017
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.