Patterns of gastroenterology specialty referral for primary care patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease.

Autor:	Bobo JFG; Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA., Keith BA; Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA., Marsden J; Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA., Zhang J; Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA., Schreiner AD; Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. Electronic address: schrein@musc.edu.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	The American journal of the medical sciences [Am J Med Sci] 2024 Nov; Vol. 368 (5), pp. 455-461. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jul 27.
DOI:	10.1016/j.amjms.2024.07.028
Abstrakt:	Background: As metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) management extends into primary care, little is known about patterns of specialty referral for affected patients. We determined the proportion of primary care patients with MASLD that received a gastroenterology (GI) consultation and compared advanced fibrosis risk between patients with and without a referral. Methods: This retrospective study of electronic health record data from a primary care clinic included patients with MASLD, no competing chronic liver disease diagnoses, and no history of cirrhosis. Referral to GI for evaluation and management (E/M) any time after MASLD ascertainment was the outcome. Fibrosis-4 Index (FIB-4) scores were calculated, categorized by advanced fibrosis risk, and compared by receipt of a GI E/M referral. Logistic regression models were developed to determine the association of FIB-4 risk with receipt of a GI referral. Results: The cohort included 652 patients of which 12% had FIB-4 scores (≥2.67) at high-risk for advanced fibrosis. Overall, 31% of cohort patients received a GI referral for E/M. There was no difference in the proportion of patients with high (12% vs. 12%, p=0.952) risk FIB-4 scores by receipt of a GI E/M referral. In adjusted logistic regression models, high-risk FIB-4 scores (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.59 - 1.71) were not associated with receipt of a referral. Conclusions: Only 30% of patients in this primary care MASLD cohort received a GI E/M referral during the study period, and those patients with a referral did not differ by FIB-4 advanced fibrosis risk. Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest All authors report no conflicts of interest with this work. (Copyright © 2024 Southern Society for Clinical Investigation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu