P1101 Patient-reported physical activity of IBD patients is of concern when weighed with the international physical activity questionnaire regardless of disease activity and IBD phenotype: barriers and facilitators emerged from the extended "BE-FIT-IBD" cross-sectional study

Abstract

Abstract Background As the World Health Organization recommends, regular physical activity (PA) determines quality of life. The qualitative/quantitative characteristics of ideal PA to be suggested for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) nor the relationship with disease activity are not yet well defined. This study aimed to weigh PA levels and barriers/facilitators to PA in a cross-sectional group of patients with IBD. Methods Consecutive Italian non-severe IBD patients (assessed with partial Mayo score for and Harvey-Bradshaw index) received an anonymous online questionnaire to assess PA levels using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), disease activity as Patient-Reported Outcomes 2 (PRO-2), and finally habits, beliefs, and barriers in conducting regular PA. Clinical, anthropometric, and demographic data were also collected. PA was processed as continuous units of resting metabolic rate in minutes/week (Met min/wk). Three PA groups were identified: inactive (< 700 Met min/wk), sufficiently active (700-2500 Met min/wk) and Health Enhancing PA (i.e., HEPA active, > 2500 Met min/wk) patients. Results The 219 patients enrolled exhibited overall PA levels of 834.5 Met min/wk, with a large proportion (94, 42.9%) classified as inactive. Only a minority (9, 4.1%) resulted as health-enhancing PA. Patients with a non-dyslipidaemia metabolic profile (p < 0.0001) or on biologics therapy (p=0.022) showed better IPAQ scores in moderate activities. PRO-2 correlated negatively with IPAQ intense activities scores (τ= -0.156, p=0.038) in ulcerative colitis patients. PRO-2 did not show notable sensitivity/specificity in predicting IPAQ inactivity (AUC < 0.6). IPAQ showed no notable differences when related to disease activity categories according to PRO-2 (p > 0.05). Physically active patients were more willing to discuss their PA with their IBDologists. Several barriers (e.g., diagnosis of IBD and fear of flare-ups after PA) are firmly rooted in physically inactive patients. Evacuation urgency (rectal syndrome) is the IBD-related barrier most physically inactive patients reported. Some fears about PA were worse felt in the absence of a stable partner (i.e., fear of worsening or recurrence of IBD, p < 0.05). Conclusion Many Italian IBD patients show a worrying rate of physical inactivity, depriving themselves of the multidimensional benefits that regular PA can bring. There is a need for IBDologists to act by removing barriers to PA and engaging in a regular discussion on the importance of PA with IBD patients. IPAQ has shown good feasibility and patient acceptance in this setting.