Skip to main content

Table 1 Patient/physician demographic characteristics and patient diagnostic pathways

From: How do patients and physicians perceive immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) as a disease? Results from Indian analysis of ITP World Impact Survey (I-WISh)

  Patients
N = 65
Mean age, years 33
Male, n (%) 39 (60%)
Female, n (%) 26 (40%)
Current health state (Score: 1, very poor health; 7, excellent health)  
 ≤ 4 26 (40%)
 Splenectomized, n (%) 6/64 (9.3%)
Diagnosis  
Median (IQR) time from symptom presentation to diagnosis, months 1.5 (0.5–5.7)
 Symptom presentation to first consultation, months 0.7 (0.1–3.0)
 First consultation to diagnosis 0.5 (0.2–1.0)
Patients with a median time from initial presentation to ITP diagnosis > 6 months, n (%) 9/55 (16%)
Patients in whom diagnosis of ITP confirmed as a result of another health condition, n (%) 2 (3%)
Delay in diagnosis, n (%) 21 (32%)
 Awaiting additional test results 8 (38%)
 Specialist reference 7 (33%)
Patient support following diagnosis, n (%)  
 Family/friends 59 (91%)
 Physicians 50 (77%)
 Nurses 24 (37%)
Patients who needed more support during the diagnosis process, n (%) 27 (42%)
 Physicians 20 (74%)
 Family/friends 13 (48%)
 Patient support groups 11 (41%)
  Physicians
N = 21
Average total patient caseload 625
Number of ITP patients seen in the last 12 months 81
Practice setting  
 Private care 12 (57%)
 Specialty cancer center 5 (24%)
 University teaching hospital and community teaching hospital 4 (19%)
Year of qualification  
 Before 1981 1 (5%)
 1981–1993 3 (14%)
 1994–2003 5 (24%)
 2004–2014 10 (48%)
 After 2014 2 (10%)
Diagnosis  
Median (IQR) time from symptom presentation to diagnosis, months 0.25 (0.25–0.62)
 Primary ITP 70%
 Secondary ITP 30%
Reasons for delay in diagnosis  
 Specialist reference 13 (62%)
 Exclusion of other potential causes 12 (57%)
Causes of secondary ITP  
 Systemic lupus erythematosus 11 (52%)
 Drug-induced thrombocytopenia 11 (52%)
 Hepatitis C virus 10 (48%)
 Chronic lymphocytic leukemia 8 (38%)
 Human immunodeficiency virus 7 (33%)
Investigation rates (asymptomatic vs high symptom burden)  
 Spleen evaluation 12 (57%) vs 16 (76%)
 Coomb’s test 5 (24%) vs 13 (76%)
 H. pylori 3 (14%) vs 8 (28%)
 Computed tomography scan 1 (5%) vs 7 (33%)
 Platelet specific assay 0% vs 4 (19%)
Misdiagnosis rates  
 Upto 25% patients are misdiagnosed 14 (67%)
 26–50% patients are misdiagnosed 5 (24%)
Most commonly misdiagnosed conditions  
 Drug induced thrombocytopenia 12 (63%)
 Leukemia 11 (58%)
 Aplastic anemia 10 (53%)