Coeliac Disease: Diagnosis, Management, and Where Nutritional Care Goes Wrong
- Rick Miller
- Aug 12
- 3 min read
Coeliac disease is an autoimmune condition in which the ingestion of gluten causes immune-mediated damage to the small intestinal mucosa. It is not an intolerance or a lifestyle choice, and it is managed not with medication but with a strict, lifelong gluten-free diet.
That makes specialist dietetic input central to care, and it makes the points at which care can fail reasonably predictable.
As an HCPC-registered dietitian, I am instructed in matters where the diagnosis or nutritional management of coeliac disease is in issue. The problems tend to cluster around two stages: reaching a secure diagnosis, and managing the condition properly once it is confirmed.
The Diagnostic Pathway, and Why Sequence Matters
NICE guidance on coeliac disease (NG20) sets out a clear pathway. Serological testing, principally total IgA and IgA tissue transglutaminase (tTG-IgA), is the first step, with referral of positive results to a gastrointestinal specialist for endoscopic duodenal biopsy to confirm the diagnosis.
The sequence is critical. NICE is explicit that a person should continue to eat gluten, in more than one meal a day for at least six weeks, before testing, and should not start a gluten-free diet until the diagnosis has been confirmed by a specialist. Advising a patient to remove gluten before testing can normalise both the serology and the biopsy and leave them without a secure diagnosis, and therefore without access to the follow-up, prescribable foods and monitoring that a confirmed diagnosis brings. Premature dietary advice is one of the commonest failure points I see.
What Inadequate Management Looks Like After Diagnosis
A confirmed diagnosis should lead to specialist dietetic input that equips the patient to maintain a genuinely gluten-free diet, to recognise and avoid cross-contamination and hidden sources of gluten, and to correct the nutritional deficiencies, iron, folate, vitamin B12, vitamin D and calcium among them, that untreated coeliac disease commonly produces. Structured annual review and monitoring of adherence and nutritional status are part of the standard, and the question of when a dietetic referral should have been made is frequently central.
In one recurring class of case, a patient is diagnosed but receives no meaningful dietetic input, continues to have symptoms and serology that never normalises, and is found on later investigation to have persisting mucosal damage and nutritional deficiency that appropriate management would have addressed.
The Consequences Show in the Record
Where management is inadequate, the effects are demonstrable rather than speculative. Persistent symptoms, serology that fails to normalise, continued villous atrophy on repeat biopsy, and deficiencies on blood testing all leave a documentary trail. That objectivity is what makes the standard of nutritional care amenable to retrospective analysis.
The Analytical Framework: Standard, Breach, Causation
My analysis establishes what the recognised standard required at each stage, whether the care provided met it, and, where it did not, what difference competent care would have made, judged on what was reasonable at the time rather than with hindsight.
Causation here is often about delay and avoidable morbidity: whether a correct diagnostic sequence or adequate dietetic management would, on the balance of probabilities, have secured an earlier diagnosis, resolved symptoms, or prevented the nutritional and longer-term consequences of untreated disease.
What a Dietitian Should Not Address
The interpretation of histology belongs to histopathology, and the endoscopic and wider medical management of complications belongs to the relevant specialists. A dietetic report stays within nutrition and the dietary pathway and says clearly where its scope ends.
Practical Guidance for Instructing Solicitors
Records to obtain include: the serology results and their dates; the record of any dietary advice given relative to the timing of testing; the referral for and results of duodenal biopsy; dietetic referral and clinic notes; annual review documentation; and blood results relevant to nutritional status over time.
Key instruction questions: Was the diagnostic pathway followed correctly, including whether gluten was inappropriately removed before testing? Was appropriate specialist dietetic input provided after diagnosis? Was nutritional status assessed and monitored? And did any failure cause an avoidable delay in diagnosis, or avoidable nutritional or clinical harm?
Independent Dietitian Expert Witness
I provide independent expert witness opinion in clinical nutrition, including coeliac disease, prepared to the standard required for court and within a clearly defined scope. You can learn more about my dietitian expert witness services or make an enquiry through rickmillerdietitian.co.uk.
Comments