AIM The survey ascertains perceptions and describes current practice of clinicians regarding medication non-adherence in patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.METHODS Gastroenterologists, trainees and inflammatory bowel disease(IBD) specialist nurses from the United Kingdom were invited to a web based survey collecting data on clinician demographics, patient volume and level of interest in IBD. Respondents were asked to estimate non-adherence levels and report use of screening tools and interventions to improve adherence.RESULTS Non-adherence was seen as an infrequent problem by 57% of 98 respondents. Levels of non-adherence were estimated lower than evidence suggests by 29% for mesalazine(5ASA), 26% for immunomodulators(IMM) and 21% for biologics(BIOL). Respondents reporting non-adherence as a frequent problem were more likely to report adherence levels in line with evidence(5ASA P < 0.001; IMM P = 0.012; BIOL P = 0.015). While 80% regarded screening as important only 25% screenregularly(40% of these with validated assessment tools). Respondents stated forgetfulness, beliefs about necessity of medication and not immediately apparent benefits as the main reasons for non-adherence. Patient counselling on benefits and risks of medication was a commonly used intervention.CONCLUSION Clinicians treating IBD patients frequently underestimate non-adherence and use of validated screening tools is infrequent. Most respondents identified the main factors associated with non-adherence in line with evidence and often counselled patients accordingly. Professional education should focus more on non-adherence practice to avoid adverse treatment outcomes associated with non-adherence. AIM The survey ascertains perceptions and described current practice of clinicians for non-adherence in patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease. METHODS Gastroenterologists, trainees and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) specialist nurses from the United Kingdom were invited to a web based survey collecting data on clinician demographics, patient volume and level of interest in IBD. Respondents were asked to to estimate non-adherence levels and report use of screening tools and interventions to improve adherence.RESULTS Non-adherence was seen as an infrequent problem. 57% of 98 respondents. Levels of non-adherence were estimated lower than likelihood suggests by 29% for mesalazine (5ASA), 26% for immunomodulators (IMM) and 21% for biologics (BIOL). Respondents reporting non-adherence as a frequent problem were more likely to report adherence levels in line with evidence (5ASA P <0.001; IMM P = 0.012; BIOL P = 0.015). While 80% sees screening as important only 25% screenreg Respondents stated forgetfulness, beliefs about necessity of medication and not immediately apparent benefits as the main reasons for non-adherence. Patient counseling on benefits and risks of medication was a commonly used intervention .CONCLUSION Clinicians treating IBD patients frequently underestimate non-adherence and use of validated screening tools is infrequent. Most respondents identified the main factors associated with non-adherence in line with evidence and often counselled patients accordingly. Professional education should focus more on non-adherence practice to avoid adverse treatment outcomes associated with non-adherence.