ASSESSMENT OF QUALITY OF LIFE IN ELDERLY PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE WITH MILD ACTIVITY AND IN CLINICAL REMISSION
Authors: FRAGA João Baptista de Paula , OLIVEIRA Alexandre Ferreira , RIBEIRO Tarsila Campanha da Rocha , SCHMIDT Lucélia Paula Cabral , SILVA Gabriela Teixeira da , CHEBLI Julio Maria Fonseca 
Published: July 2024

ABSTRACT Background: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), represented by Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), is a chronic condition that affects all age groups, predominantly in young individuals. Currently, an increase in the prevalence of IBD has been documented, in parallel with the increase in the elderly population. The scarce number of studies that better characterize the impact of IBD on Quality of Life (QoL) in the elderly motivated the present study. Objective: To evaluate the impact of IBD on the QoL of elderly people treated at a Tertiary IBD Center. Methods: Prospective cross-sectional study that included elderly patients (age ≥60 years) with quiescent or mildly active IBD treated at the HU-UFJF IBD Center between March 2019 and December 2022. Elderly companions without severe comorbidities who attended the consultation with the patients were included as a control group. Sociodemographic and IBD-related characteristics were recorded. QoL was assessed using previously validated questionnaires (WHOQOL-BREF and IBDQ). Patients with IBD with moderate to severe activity, history of recent or imminent hospitalization, serious or opportunistic infections in the last 6 months, previous neoplasia, dementia, and difficulty understanding/fulfilling the questionnaires were excluded. Results: A total of 123 patients were included (74 with IBD and 49 in the control group), with a mean age of 67±6.2 years, 52.7% with CD, and 47.3% with UC. Mild disease activity was observed in 31.1%. Both groups (IBD patients and control) were comparable based on age, sex, BMI, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index. Patients with IBD and controls had similar QoL scores in the different domains assessed by the WHOQOL-BREF. On the other hand, when evaluating the general facet of QoL, IBD patients had significantly lower scores in General QoL (3.71±0.87 versus 4.02±0.62, respectively; P=0.021) and General Health (3.32±1.05 versus 3.69±0.94, respectively; P=0.035). The presence of mildly active IBD negatively impacted the general health score (2.91±0.99 versus 3.47±1.04, respectively; P=0.035) and the physical domain of the WHOQOL-BREF (12.27±2.63 versus 13.86±2.61, respectively; P=0.019) when compared to patients in remission. Conversely, no impact on QoL was observed with the Application of the IBDQ questionnaire regarding the type of the disease (161±38.5 versus 163.1±42.6 for CD and UC, respectively; P=0.84) or the presence of activity (152.5±38.8 versus 166.4±40.5, respectively; P=0.17). Conclusion: No statistically significant differences were found between elderly patients with mildly active or quiescent IBD and elderly patients without IBD when observing global QoL scores. However, IBD negatively impacted the general facet of QoL, just as mild activity was associated with lower scores in general health and the physical domain assessed by the WHOQOL-BREF. Patients with IBD treated with biological therapy had better Qol than those on conventional therapy. Future studies are needed to choose the most appropriate tool for assessing QoL in this population.