Uptake of recommended vaccines among IBD patients is suboptimal. Annual vaccination reviews by both family physician and gastroenterologist may improve vaccine uptake. Interventions targeted at improving vaccination uptake in IBD patients are needed.

SUMMARY Background

VTE prophylaxis was more frequent on the surgical service, where standardized protocols exist. The introduction of a pharmacist advocate greatly increased VTE prophylaxis on the non-surgical services. Prophylactic anticoagulation is safe in IBD despite the presence of rectal bleeding on admission.

There is significant variation in reported practices for VTE prophylaxis in IBD patients among gastroenterologists. A more standardized approach to VTE prophylaxis should be implemented to improve health outcomes for IBD inpatients.

Ambulatory IBD patients have similar prevalence of MRSA, ESBL and VRE compared to non-IBD controls. This finding suggests that the increased MRSA and VRE prevalence observed in hospitalized IBD patients is acquired in-hospital rather than in the outpatient setting.

Although the majority of respondents demonstrated awareness of most extraintestinal manifestations, few realized that venous thromboembolism was a life-threatening systemic complication of inflammatory bowel disease. Greater knowledge of venous thromboembolism would enable patients to more promptly seek potentially life-saving intervention.

From this pilot study, there appears to be low prevalence of asymptomatic DVTs among patients with IBD during flares. The high prevalence of elevated D-dimer in DVT-negative patients limits its utility in IBD.

There was a general consensus among academic gastroenterologists that IBD inpatients are at an increased risk for VTE and would benefit from VTE prophylaxis. However, areas of uncertainty still exist and the IBD community would benefit from evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to standardize the management of this important problem.