P558 Validation of the ‘IBD Disk’ in clinical practice

Background The inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) Disk is a tool that has been developed from the IBD Disability Index in order to objectively measure the degree of disability in patients suffering from IBD. It provides a visual representation of disability state, thereby increasing the ease of application in a clinical setting. Currently, it has not yet been validated in any population. Our primary aim was to hence validate the IBD Disk in a clinical setting. Methods 40 patients were recruited from an outpatient setting in a tertiary centre in Australia. All patients completed four surveys, the IBD Disk, the IBD Disability Index (IBD-DI), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS) and the Shortened IBD Questionnaire (SIBDQ). Nineteen of these patients then elaborated on their answers in a semi-structured narrative interview based on the IBD Disk. After a consultation with a gastroenterologist, the treating doctors were also asked to fill out an IBD Disk based on their own perceptions of the participant’s degree of disability. The IBD Disk was assessed for its internal consistency, construct validity and factor structure. The qualitative data were analysed and coded using NVIVO and then associated to IBD Disk scores. Results Of the patients recruited 48% were female, 30% had ulcerative colitis and 52% were in clinical remission. Average IBD Disk score was 40.75. Our results suggest the IBD Disk is an internally consistent tool for clinical use when assessing disability (Cronbach’s Α = 0.888). This is supported by statistically significant differences in IBD Disk scores between patients in clinical remission and patients with active disease (p = 0.002). There is also a good correlation between the Patient-Reported IBD Disk scores and the IBD-DI scores (r = 0.864), Doctor Perceived IBD Disk scores (r = 0.794) and the HADS Depression score (r = 0.759). IBD Disk scores also negatively correlated with the Shortened IBD Questionnaire (r = −0.864). Qualitative data also correlate well thematically with IBD Disk scores. These results suggest an appropriate system for grading disability status via the IBD Disk is: 0–24 = no disability; 25–49 = mild disability; 50–74 = moderate disability; and, 75–100 = severe disability. Conclusion This study supports the use of the IBD Disk as a reliable and valid self-reporting tool in clinical situations. There is strong internal consistency, construct validity, factor structure and qualitative thematic association. However, more data are needed to further validate the IBD Disk. Most significantly though, the IBD Disk is likely to become a valuable tool for the practical assessment of disability in patients with IBD in the near future.