Media Discourse on the Social Acceptability of Fecal Transplants

Patient knowledge of gut microbiota and acceptability of fecal microbiota transplantation in various diseases

BACKGROUND

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is now evaluated in various diseases. However, large-scale population treatment may encounter feasibility issues in terms of acceptance. We aim to evaluate patient knowledge of gut microbiota and the acceptability of FMT in various diseases.

METHODS

Patients of Carenity's French online community were invited by email to participate in a questionnaire. The following parameters were assessed: patient's principal illness and duration, demographic data, therapeutics, dietary habits, knowledge of gut microbiota, probiotics and FMT, and its acceptability.

KEY RESULTS

In total, 877 patients participated in the online questionnaire: 156 with inflammatory bowel disease (17.8%), 127 with rheumatoid arthritis (14.5%), 222 with ankylosing spondylitis (25.3%), 52 with lupus (5.9%), 64 with psoriasis (7.3%), 61 with obesity (7%), and 195 with type 2 diabetes (22.2%). Characteristics of participating patients were similar to those of the entire cohort (n = 23084). Overall, 47.1% (n = 413/877) of patients knew what the microbiota is with no difference among diseases. Knowledge was reported to be developed by patients themselves (203/413; 49.2%) without involving a healthcare professional. If proposed by a healthcare professional, 37.2% (326/877) reported being interested or very interested in undergoing FMT. Factors associated with good acceptability of FMT were the male sex (OR: 1.63, CI95% [1.14 to 2.32]), previous knowledge of FMT (OR: 4.16, CI95% [2.92 to 5.96]), and previous knowledge of gut microbiota (OR: 1.54, CI95% [1.05 to 2.24]).

CONCLUSION AND INFERENCES

Knowledge of gut microbiota is still limited in patients' communities and mainly developed by patients themselves, impacting FMT acceptability.

Faecal microbiota transplants: towards a healthy disgust scepticism

This paper engages with the obstacle of disgust surrounding the use of faecal microbiota transplants (FMT). In discourse about the human microbiome and microbiota-based therapies (like FMT), disgust has become an unavoidable emotion for physicians, patients and caregivers interested in these therapies. Additionally, microbiota therapies and microbiomes are challenging our conception of an individual biological self. As these two discourses converge with FMT, it becomes necessary to understand how they are working together. To do this, this paper explores the way disgust functions in the formation of subjects. Scholarship about disgust can be categorised into two approaches: disgust as a deep wisdom or disgust scepticism. The former approach focuses on the physiological, embodied aspects of our disgust reactions as evidence of 'truth' in disgusting encounters, and the latter recognises the way disgust is culturally contingent and adapted for use in moral and social determinations of good and bad. However, both positions accept the use of disgust as a defence against 'toxins and diseases'. Yet, as this paper argues, we should take the sceptical approach further. The disgust sceptical approach, particularly as developed by Sarah Ahmed, does more than just challenge disgust's role in moral deliberations. It also demands sceptical reflection on disgust as a universal defence against 'toxins and diseases'. Much as disgust can be co-opted to support oppression, it too can be co-opted to reconstitute a false vision of human subjectivity-the coherent, contained and exceptional human subject situated above the natural world. The human microbiome, faecal therapeutics and being disgusted give us an opportunity to recognise ourselves as more-than-human subjects.

Healthcare providers' perception of faecal microbiota transplantation with clostridium difficile infection and inflammatory bowel disease: a quantitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are global gastroenterological diseases that cause considerable burden on human health, healthcare systems, and society. Faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is an effective treatment for recurrent Clostridioides Difficile Infection (rCDI) and a promising therapy for IBD. However, indication for FMT in IBD is still unofficial. Consequently, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is seeking healthcare providers' advice on whether to update FMT guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic review methodology was adopted for this study. Five databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science) and grey literature were systematically searched for English language literature to 14 May 2021. The quality of the included studies was then appraised using the Institute for Public Health Sciences cross-sectional studies tool, after which the findings of the studies were narratively synthesised.

RESULTS

Thirteen cross-sectional studies with 4110 validated questionnaire responses were included. Narrative synthesis found that 39.43% of respondents were familiar with FMT (N = 3746, 95%CI = 37.87%-41%), 58.81% of respondents would recommend FMT to their patients (N = 1141, 95%CI = 55.95%-61.67%), 66.67% of respondents considered lack of clinical evidence was the greatest concern regarding FMT (N = 1941, 95%CI = 64.57%-68.77%), and 40.43% respondents would not implement FMT due to concerns about infection transmission (N = 1128, 95%CI = 37.57%-43.29%).

CONCLUSION

Healthcare providers' knowledge of FMT is relatively low and education is an effective strategy to improve it. As knowledge of FMT increases, willingness to recommend it also increases. Strengthening FMT clinical efficacy and reducing infection can enhance its public acceptance, application and popularity. However, further research is required to explore the donor screening procedure.

Qualitative Research in Clinical Epidemiology

This chapter provides an overview of qualitative research approaches in the study of health, disease, and health service delivery and summarizes important considerations when designing research studies to address questions that ask the "how," "why," or "what" of a particular issue. As qualitative research encompasses distinct methodologies, brief descriptions of the main approaches and examples from the literature are provided. Guidance on how to evaluate quality in the design and reporting of qualitative studies is also discussed.

Microbiome research in general and business newspapers: How many microbiome articles are published and which study designs make the news the most?

The microbiome is a matter of interest for science, consumers and business. Our objective is to quantify that interest in academic journals and newspapers, both quantitatively and by study design. We calculated the number of articles on the microbiome from the total number of biomedicine articles featured in both PubMed and Spanish science news agency SINC, from 2008 to 2018. We used the Factiva database to identify news stories on microbiome papers in three general newspapers (The New York Times, The Times and El País) and three business newspapers (The Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times and Expansión), from 2007 to 2019. Then, we compared news stories with microbiome papers in PubMed, while also analyzing the frequencies of five study design types, both in the newspapers and in the papers themselves. Microbiome papers represented 0.8% of biomedicine papers in PubMed from 2008 to 2018 (increasing from 0.4% to 1.4%), while microbiome news published by SINC represented 1.6% of total biomedical news stories during the same period (increasing from 0.2% to 2.2%). The number of news stories on microbiome papers correlated with the number of microbiome papers (0.91, p < 0.001) featured in general newspapers, but not in business ones. News stories on microbiome papers represented 78.9% and 42.7% of all microbiome articles in general and business newspapers, respectively. Both media outlet types tended to over-report observational studies in humans while under-reporting environmental studies, while the representation of systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials, randomized controlled trials and animal/laboratory studies was similar when comparing newspapers and PubMed. The microbiome is receiving increasing attention in academic journals and newspapers. News stories on the microbiome in general and business newspapers are mostly based on research findings and are more interested in observational studies in humans and less in environmental studies compared to PubMed.

Faecal microbiota transplantation and the patient experience: A systematic review

AIM

To review and synthesise the literature examining the patients' experience of faecal microbiota transplantation.

BACKGROUND

Faecal microbiota transplantation is a common treatment for many conditions, including Clostridium Difficile infections. Patients' experience of treatments is an important influence on clinical decision-making and treatment adherence.

DESIGN

The PRISMA guidelines guided this systematic review. The review was registered with PROSPERO [CRD42020140446].

METHOD

A search of Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Medline and Embase was conducted for studies published in English and French up to June 2020. Risk of bias was examined using Critical Appraisal Skills Program tools, and quality appraisal was performed independently by three reviewers. Primary outcome of interest was the patient experience of faecal microbiota transplantation. Data were synthesised using a narrative approach.

RESULTS

The search identified 3316 citations, and 12 studies were included. Methodological quality of studies was moderate to low quality. Few studies have accurately explored the patients' experience of faecal microbiota transplantation: most focus on clinical outcomes or hypothetical scenarios regarding the patients' perspectives of faecal microbiota transplantation. Only one study was identified where the sole focus was the patients' experience of faecal microbiota transplantation. Patient's experience of faecal microbiota transplantation was diverse and complex with physiological and psychological components dependent on the patient's medical condition, the administration method and the efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Patients did not find faecal microbiota transplantation unappealing; however, patients equally reported the procedural experience was unpleasant. Limited results and low quality evidence suggest that further evaluation of the patient experience of faecal microbiota transplantation would be beneficial.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Identifying the patients' experience of faecal microbiota transplantation may inform recommendations regarding alternate treatment therapies and enable opportunities to provide quality care for patients that require faecal microbiota transplantation.

Eligible blood donors' decisions about donating stool for fecal microbiota transplantation: Does ambivalence play a role?

Blood collection agencies (BCAs) are expanding core business by inviting blood donors to donate stool for fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT). However, whether blood donors also want to donate stool is unclear since, despite its benefits, stool donation is viewed by many as unpleasant. This study examined the prevalence, contributors to, and role of these mixed feelings (ambivalence) in stool donation intentions.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study surveyed Australian residents aged 18 years or more who believed themselves eligible to donate blood and met broad criteria for prescreening as a stool donor (eg, healthy, not taking medication). Survey questions assessed attitude, norms, self-efficacy, motives, disgust, ambivalence, and intentions to donate stool.

RESULTS

A total of 382 eligible blood donors aged not more than 50 years (mean, 28.71 years; 48% female, 62% "healthy" body mass index) participated. Six percent indicated no ambivalence about donating stool. In regression, significant determinants of ambivalence were less awareness of FMT, lower self-efficacy, motivated by ensuring that stool is available for loved ones, and more disgust about stool donation. Higher ambivalence contributed to decreased donation intention. Self-efficacy and disgust differentiated participants with moderate ambivalence, a group likely responsive to intervention, from those with low or high ambivalence.

CONCLUSION

Ambivalence about donating stool was common among eligible blood donors. BCAs should raise awareness about stool donation and FMT before requesting donation. BCAs may increase cost savings and donor retention by giving clear guidance about donation requirements and implementing processes that build confidence. Early screening of potential donors for ambivalence and disgust will enable BCAs to provide decision support.

Disgusting microbes: The effect of disgust on perceptions of risks related to modifying microbiomes

Research on perceived risks of scientific issues has largely overlooked the influence of disgust as a predictor. Here, we examine the impact of disgust on perceived risks of modifying microbiomes using a 2 (emotion) × 2 (focus) experiment embedded in an online survey. We find evidence of moderated mediation where individuals exposed to an article about microbiome research and therapies with explicit references to disgusting stimuli perceived greater risk through a mediating variable, elicited disgust. This indirect effect is moderated by the focus of the article; those who viewed a human-focused article experienced greater disgust and reported greater perceived risks. These findings have implications for assessing and addressing lay audiences' reactions to an emerging issue that has significant societal implications.

When Your Pregnancy Echoes Your Illness: Transition to Motherhood With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Our aim is to provide an understanding of the experience of women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who have made the transition to motherhood. A total of 22 mothers with IBD were recruited from around the United Kingdom. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis. The central concept- Blurred Lines-offers a novel frame for understanding the transition to motherhood with IBD through identifying parallels between having IBD and becoming, and being, a mother. Parallels clustered into three main themes: Need for Readiness, Lifestyle Changes, and Monitoring Personal and Physical Development. Hence, women with IBD are in some ways well prepared for the challenges of motherhood even though, as a group, they tend to restrict their reproductive choices. We recommend health professionals initiate conversations about reproduction early and provide a multidisciplinary approach to pregnancy and IBD in which women have confidence that their ongoing treatment will be integrated successfully with their maternity care.

How Chinese clinicians face ethical and social challenges in fecal microbiota transplantation: a questionnaire study

BACKGROUND

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is reportedly the most effective therapy for relapsing Clostridium Difficile infection (CDI) and a potential therapeutic option for many diseases. It also poses important ethical concerns. This study is an attempt to assess clinicians' perception and attitudes towards ethical and social challenges raised by fecal microbiota transplantation.

METHODS

A questionnaire was developed which consisted of 20 items: four items covered general aspects, nine were about ethical aspects such as informed consent and privacy issues, four concerned social and regulatory issues, and three were about an FMT bank. This was distributed to participants at the Second China gastroenterology and FMT conference in May 2015. Basic descriptive statistical analyses and simple comparative statistical tests were performed.

RESULTS

Nearly three quarters of the 100 respondents were gastro-enterologist physicians. 89% of all respondents believed FMT is a promising treatment modality for some diseases and 88% of whom chose clinical efficacy as the primary reason for recommending FMT. High expectation from patients and pressure on clinicians (33%) was reported as the most frequent reasons for not recommending FMT. The clinicians who had less familiarity with FMT reported significantly more worry related to the dignity and psychological impact of FMT compared to those who have high familiarity with FMT (51.6% vs 27.8%, p = 0.021).More than half of the respondents (56.1%) were concerned about the commercialization of FMT, although almost one in five respondents did not see this as a problem.

CONCLUSIONS

We found most respondents have positive attitudes towards FMT but low awareness of published evidence. Informed consent for vulnerable patients, privacy and protection of donors were perceived as the most challenging ethical aspects of FMT. This study identified areas of limited knowledge and ways of addressing ethical issues and indicates the need to devise the education and training for clinicians on FMT.

Navigating social and ethical challenges of biobanking for human microbiome research

BACKGROUND

Biobanks are considered to be key infrastructures for research development and have generated a lot of debate about their ethical, legal and social implications (ELSI). While the focus has been on human genomic research, rapid advances in human microbiome research further complicate the debate.

DISCUSSION

We draw on two cystic fibrosis biobanks in Toronto, Canada, to illustrate our points. The biobanks have been established to facilitate sample and data sharing for research into the link between disease progression and microbial dynamics in the lungs of pediatric and adult patients. We begin by providing an overview of some of the ELSI associated with human microbiome research, particularly on the implications for the broader society. We then discuss ethical considerations regarding the identifiability of samples biobanked for human microbiome research, and examine the issue of return of results and incidental findings. We argue that, for the purposes of research ethics oversight, human microbiome research samples should be treated with the same privacy considerations as human tissues samples. We also suggest that returning individual microbiome-related findings could provide a powerful clinical tool for care management, but highlight the need for a more grounded understanding of contextual factors that may be unique to human microbiome research.

CONCLUSIONS

We revisit the ELSI of biobanking and consider the impact that human microbiome research might have. Our discussion focuses on identifiability of human microbiome research samples, and return of research results and incidental findings for clinical management.