Search in the Abstract Database

Search Abstracts 2015

* = Presenting author

P332 Impact of Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Japanese patients' lives: International comparison of patients' views

F. Ueno*1, Y. Nakayama2, E. Hagiwara2, O. Mikami3, A. Inamine-Sasaki3, T. Hibi4

1Ofuna Chuo Hospital, Department of Medicine, Kamakura, Kanagawa, Japan, 2IBD Network, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan, 3AbbVie GK, Medical Affiars, Medical, Tokyo, Japan, 4Kitasato Institute Hospital, Kitasato University, Center for Advanced IBD Research and Treatment, Tokyo, Japan


Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has a substantial negative effect on quality of life; however, little is known about the impact of IBD on patients' lives. The European Federation of Crohn's and Ulcerative Colitis Associations (EFCCA) conducted the European Crohn's and Ulcerative Colitis Patient Life Impact Survey (IMPACT survey) for 2010-2011 to obtain an international perspective on the impact of IBD on patients' lives. We conducted the IMPACT survey in Japan and compared our Results with those of the European survey.


The Japanese version of the IMPACT survey questionnaire was provided to IBD patients through patient advocacy groups, either online or by postal mail. The questionnaire comprised 52 questions on patients' experiences and treatment of IBD, and the impact of IBD on their lives. Participation was voluntary, and data collection preserved patient anonymity.


Between June 2013 and January 2014, 172 Japanese IBD patients completed the questionnaire (ulcerative colitis, 84 patients; Crohn's disease, 83 patients; unclassifiable, 1 patient; no response, 4 patients). The Japanese and European survey Results slightly differed in terms of patient background, complications, and treatment. The major differences included the fact that most of the Japanese patients went to an emergency clinic or department before receiving a definitive diagnosis (Japan vs. Europe: 95.9% vs. 67.3%), fewer Japanese patients received corticosteroids (16.3% vs. 20.5%), more Japanese patients received aminosalicylates (76.2% vs. 47.4%), the Japanese patients' satisfaction of operative outcome was lower (52.9% vs. 72.9%), and fewer Japanese patients were hospitalised within the last five years (58.1% vs. 84.6%). Both patient groups answered gastroenterologist as the professional who best understands the impact of IBD on their lives (both > 60%), but the proportions of patients who selected family physician (18.6% vs. 28.1%) and counsellor (2.9% vs. 8.2%) differed between the groups. Meanwhile, the responses to most of the questions were similar between the two groups; many of the Japanese patients were concerned about communication with their physicians and experienced inconvenience in daily life and work due to IBD.


Despite the differences in race, living environment, and medical service system between Japan and Europe, the impact of IBD on patients' lives was similar between the two groups. Information on the unmet needs of Japanese patients with IBD may help provide sufficient medical and administrative support, improve working and educational environments, and increase the awareness of health care providers in order to bridge communication gaps between patients and physicians.