Search

Background: There is a need to improve psychological care for people with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD), noting the high psychosocial burden of disease. Aims: This study qualitatively explored the views of people living with IBD to help inform future co-design of services that better meet the psychological needs of consumers. Methods: Adults with IBD were recruited to attend virtual focus groups to discuss what they want most in an IBD-specific psychological service. The discussions were recorded and transcribed, and data were analyzed using conventional qualitative content analysis. Draft results were summarized midway and reviewed by remaining focus groups and a final expert consumer. A quantitative dataset was created of comment frequencies. Results: Thirty-one participants took part in the study: 10 focus groups were held with an average of three participants per group. The analysis identified 254 codes, 38 sub-categories and six categories. Five main categories were identified for an IBD-specific psychological service: People-Centered Healthcare (commented on by 90% of participants), Education and Preparation (83%), Social Connection (83%), Psychological Input (93%), and Accessible Services (97%). Results were summarized in a set of proposed clinical guidelines. Conclusions: The findings of this study identify important insights from people living with IBD regarding priorities for psychological services. IBD services should focus on improving education, addressing social connection, and integrating psychological input, as well as becoming more people-centered and accessible. It is hoped that IBD services consult the proposed clinical guidelines to inform co-designed service improvements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Limited information is available about patterns of healthcare utilization for prevalent gastrointestinal conditions and their link to symptom burden. Aim: To identify patterns of healthcare utilization among outpatients with highly prevalent gastrointestinal conditions and define the link between healthcare utilization, symptom burden, and disease group. Methods: We randomly selected patients from the gastroenterology outpatient clinic at Princess Alexandra Hospital who had chronic gastrointestinal conditions such as constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C, n = 101), diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D, n = 101), mixed IBS (n = 103), inflammatory bowel disease with acute flare (n = 113), IBD in remission (n = 103), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (n = 102). All had presented at least 12 months before and had a 12-month follow-up after the index consultation. Healthcare utilization data were obtained from state-wide electronic medical records over a 24-month period. Intensity of gastrointestinal symptoms was measured using the validated Structured Assessment of Gastrointestinal Symptoms (SAGIS) Scale. Latent class analyses (LCA) based on healthcare utilization were used to identify distinct patterns of healthcare utilization among these patients. Results: LCA revealed four distinct healthcare utilization patterns across all diagnostic groups: Group A: Emergency department utilizers, Group B: Outpatient focused care utilizers, Group C: Inpatient care utilizers and Group D: Inpatient care and emergency department utilizers. LCA groups with high emergency utilization were characterized by high gastrointestinal symptom burden at index consultation regardless of condition (Mean (standard deviation)) SAGIS score Group A: 24.63 (± 14.11), Group B: 19.18 (± 15.77), Group C: 22.48 (± 17.42), and Group D: 17.59 (± 13.74, p < 0.05). Conclusion: Distinct healthcare utilization patterns across highly prevalent gastrointestinal conditions exist. Symptom severity rather than diagnosis, likely reflecting unmet clinical need, defines healthcare utilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Dedicated multidisciplinary programs in gastroenterology are emerging with the goal to improve care. There is little information about the effects of a celiac disease program on disease-related quality care metrics and outcomes. We aimed to compare quality care metrics, symptom resolution, and serological response among patients diagnosed and treated in a celiac disease program with a standard of care cohort. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study with adult celiac disease patients. We divided patients into two groups: celiac disease patients treated in our program and those treated by gastroenterologists not affiliated with the program (standard of care). We abstracted data from electronical medical records and compared frequency at which guideline-driven quality care metrics were obtained, assessed symptom resolution, and serological response based on IgA anti-tissue transglutaminase levels. Results: We included 340 patients, 120 in the celiac disease program (89 women) and 220 (166 women) in the standard of care. Frequency of quality care metrics implementation in program patients was significantly greater for all variables (p < 0.0005). Diarrhea resolved in 38/46 (82.6%) in the CD program and 63/98 (64.2%) in the standard of care after starting a gluten-free diet (p =.025); bloating also resolved significantly more often in the former (26/34) than the latter (31/58; p = 0.03). Otherwise, there were no significant differences in resolution of clinical symptoms or serological response. Conclusion: A celiac disease program improves celiac-related quality care metrics and may improve outcomes such as diarrhea resolution compared to standard of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is one of the most serious chronic diseases affecting the global population. Clinical team members involved in the care of individuals with IBD should have sufficient knowledge about IBD. Aims: The study aim was to assess IBD knowledge among four health care professional groups in New Zealand: nurses, medical students, dietitians, and pharmacists. Methods: All four groups completed surveys on demographics, work experience, and contact with patients with IBD. All completed a validated IBD knowledge assessment questionnaire (IBD-KID2), and percentage scores with standard deviation (SD) for each group calculated and compared. Results: Participants included 200 nurses, 196 medical students, 45 dietitians, and 28 pharmacists. Mean IBD-KID2 percentage scores were nurses 69.7% (SD 14.7), medical students 77.6% (SD 14.5), dietitians 87.4% (SD 8.3), and pharmacists 83.4% (SD 10.1). Nurses scored lower than other HCP (P < 0.001). Independent variables were associated (P < 0.05) with higher scores for nurses having first degree relative with IBD, access to IBD guidelines, worked with children with IBD; medical students in their clinical years of study; and dietitians with IBD-specific education. Specific items scored poorly: growth, food triggers, heritability of IBD, and nutrient absorption. Conclusions: Knowledge gaps exist among HCP that may be addressed with targeted education. Improvements in the knowledge of those caring for people with IBD may optimize patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, elective colonoscopies were postponed in Ohio from 3/17/2020 to 5/1/2020. When the ban was lifted, canceled patients determined whether to reschedule their colonoscopy in the midst of the ongoing pandemic. Aims: We aim to determine whether demographic, colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, and COVID-19 morbidity and mortality risk factors are associated with rescheduling of colonoscopies canceled by the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A medical record review of 420 participants ages 40–74 at a midwestern academic health system with elective colonoscopies canceled from 3/17/2020 to 5/1/2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic was performed. Results: More than half of participants (71.0%) rescheduled their colonoscopy within the next 8 months. Indication for colonoscopy being 'surveillance following adenoma', colonoscopy ordered by primary care provider rather than gastroenterologist, and dyslipidemia were independently associated with rescheduling colonoscopy. Higher body mass index, indication for colonoscopy being simply 'screening for CRC,' and stool testing were associated with not rescheduling. Diagnoses associated with colorectal cancer risk such as adenomas, personal or family history of colorectal cancer, and inflammatory bowel disease were not associated with rescheduling, nor were other comorbidities associated with increased COVID-19 severity. 4.5% (19/420) opted for stool fecal immunochemical test or Cologuard testing. Conclusions: Most patients rescheduled their colonoscopy despite the risk of virus exposure, suggesting that concern of missed colorectal cancer diagnosis outweighed coronavirus concerns. Patient trust in referring providers may be important for rescheduling, and colonoscopy indications were independently associated with rescheduling status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: A comprehensive understanding of endometriosis and its common gastrointestinal presentations are critical for gastroenterologists to ensure appropriate and timely screening and diagnosis. Endometriosis is a common inflammatory disease that frequently presents with gastrointestinal symptoms overlapping with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and other gastrointestinal disorders. Many endometriosis patients first present to a gastroenterologist or generalist, which may prolong the time to diagnosis and appropriate care. Method and Results: This review describes the current literature on endometriosis presentation, overlap with gastrointestinal conditions, and standard diagnostic and treatment options for gastroenterologists to consider. For appropriate and swift treatment, gastroenterologists must consider an endometriosis diagnosis in females of menstruating age presenting with pain, bloating, altered stools, and non-gastrointestinal symptoms and refer patients for further evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Academic gastroenterology (GI) hospitalists are increasing, however the impacts on fellowship training and clinical care are unclear. Motivations for implementation of the GI hospitalist model are uninvestigated. Aims: We aimed to determine the prevalence of GI hospitalists, explore motivations for and against adoption of a GIH model, and investigate the model's effects on fellowship training. Methods: Leadership at current general GI fellowships were surveyed about current staffing models, as well as effects and perceptions of the hospitalist model. Results: There was a total of 52 (26%) respondents and 12 (23%) reported having a GI hospitalist at their institution. A majority of respondents stated burnout and reduced time on service for other faculty was a primary reason for hiring a GI hospitalist. Discussion: The largest perceived benefit of a hospitalist is reduced burnout and time on service for outpatient GI faculty. Many respondents also believed a GIH would improve fellowship education and quality of inpatient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: There is a paucity of research on the use of the electronic health record (EHR) by gastroenterology and hepatology providers and its effect on work–life balance. Our aim was to study the after-hour EHR work completed among providers within a multispecialty academic practice. Methods: Time spent completing EHR tasks during evening hours (7p-7a) and days off was prospectively recorded for 35 providers over six consecutive months at a single center. Type and time of EHR tasks completed were compared based on subspecialty, academic degree, academic track category, identified gender, and number of weekly assigned clinical days worked. Prior to the data collection, providers filled out a survey regarding EHR use, work hours, and work–life balance. Results: All providers used EHR during evening hours and during days off. The total mean after-hours time spent completing EHR tasks was 18.4 m (± 13.0) per day and 45.0 m (± 25.8) during days off. There was significant variation in the daily mean after-hours time spent completing EHR tasks among subspecialties, range 45.3 m (± 27.1) (advanced endoscopy)-28.7 m (± 22.7) (hepatology), and among providers who work clinically > 7.5 days per week versus those who do not, 42.1 m (± 25.7) vs 30.0 m (± 14.0). The most common after-hours EHR task was note completion. 83% providers reported being unable to complete EHR tasks during allotted workday time and 87% report that EHR tasks interfered with family life; 74% with social life. Conclusion: Gastroenterology and hepatology providers spend a significant amount of after-hour time completing EHR tasks which is perceived to interfere with family/social life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Providers may incorporate the practice of obesity medicine into disease-state related practice (e.g., incorporating specific NAFLD-directed therapy with obesity medicine treatments for weight management). For starting gastroenterology (GI) fellows, or for gastroenterologists in practice, specializing in obesity medicine may not be the first option that crosses your mind. [Extracted from the article]

Introduction: Endoscopic procedures place a great deal of muscular strain on providers, especially over the span of their careers. In this study we quantitatively analyzed the effects of patient factors such as age, body mass index, and sex on the ergonomics of endoscopists performing colonoscopies. Methods: Surface electromyography (sEMG) was used to measure ergonomic strain of physicians while performing colonoscopies in several key muscle groups. The percent of the maximum voluntary contraction (%MVC) was used as a measure of muscular strain. Data was then analyzed based on the patient characteristics above. Results: Endoscopists performing colonoscopies on female patients (n = 47) experienced significantly higher ergonomic strain in their right trapezius and right posterior forearm muscle groups when compared to colonoscopies performed on males (n = 35) (%MVC R-trapezius: Male: 8.2; Female: 8.9; p = 0.048); (%MVC R-posterior forearm: Male: 10.4; Female: 11.6; p = 0.0006). Operators experienced greater strain in the same muscle groups when performing colonoscopies on patients with BMI ≤ 25 (n = 25) when compared to patients with BMI > 25 (n = 57) (%MVC R-trapezius: BMI < 25: 9.7; BMI ≥ 25: 8.2; p = 0.0002); (%MVC R-posterior forearm: BMI < 25: 11.9; BMI ≥ 25: 10.8; p = 0.0001). Conclusion: Physicians experienced greater ergonomic strain when performing colonoscopies on female patients and on patients with a BMI < 25. We believe that these factors potentially impact the tortuosity of the colon and therefore influence the difficulty of navigating the endoscope. These results may aid physicians in gauging the anticipated difficulty of colonoscopies based on patient factors. Increased awareness of their posturing and ergonomics during challenging cases will alleviate musculoskeletal injuries in the long run. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Few data describing pre-diagnosis changes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) exist. We aimed to determine if there is a pattern of change in use of health resources, medications and laboratory results in the years preceding diagnosis. Methods: This retrospective study used electronic medical records of Maccabi Health Services (MHS). Patients with IBD ≥ 16 years of age and minimum of 5-years follow-up were identified by entry into the MHS IBD registry and included in the analysis. Demographic, clinical, medication and laboratory data were collected. Generalized estimating equation model was applied to study trends and compare between years. Results: This study included 5643 patients with IBD. Of these, 3039 (53.8%) had Crohn's disease (CD), 2322 (41.1%) had ulcerative colitis (UC) and 282 (5%) had indeterminate colitis (IC). Laboratory parameters including white blood cells, platelets and C-reactive protein showed significant increases while haemoglobin and mean cell volume showed significant decreases in mean values in the 2 years prior to diagnosis with stable values prior to that (p < 0.0001). Parameters such as creatinine, total protein and albumin showed significant, progressive decreases in mean values starting 5 years prior to diagnosis (p < 0.0001). Patients with CD had distinct laboratory trends when compared with patients with UC. Conclusions: Changes in laboratory parameters, healthcare service and medication use occur during the 5-year period before IBD diagnosis. These data can have future clinical applicability by developing a composite score and referral algorithm introducing red flags into primary care visits and appropriate referral for specialist care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The results of this study suggest that any intervention (patient-oriented, physician-oriented, or barrier-oriented) can help increase rates of vaccine uptake among patients with IBD. Although most gastroenterologists perceive vaccinations as "extremely important", only about 50% routinely collected vaccination status information from patients with IBD [[10]]. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGID) are linked to a variety of potential causes, and treatments include reassurance, life-style (including diet), psychological, or pharmacologic interventions. Aims: To assess whether a multidisciplinary integrated treatment approach delivered in a dedicated integrated care clinic (ICC) was superior to the standard model of care in relation to the gastrointestinal symptom burden. Methods: A matched cohort of 52 consecutive patients with severe manifestation of FGID were matched with 104 control patients based upon diagnosis, gender, age, and symptom severity. Patients in the ICC received structured assessment and 12-weeks integrated treatment sessions provided as required by gastroenterologist and allied health team. Control patients received standard medical care at the same tertiary center with access to allied health services as required but no standardized interprofessional team approach. Primary outcome was reduction in gastrointestinal symptom burden as measured by the Structured Assessment of Gastrointestinal Symptoms Scale (SAGIS). Secondary outcome was reduction in anxiety and depressive symptoms as measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Results: Mixed models estimated the within ICC change in SAGIS total as −9.7 (95% CI −13.6, −5.8; p < 0.0001), compared with −1.7 (95% CI −4.0, 0.6; p = 0.15) for controls. The difference between groups reached statistical significance, −7.6 (95% CI −11.4, −3.8; p < 0.0001). Total HADS scores in ICC patients were 3.4 points lower post-intervention and reached statistical significance (p = 0.001). Conclusion: This matched cohort study demonstrates superior short-term outcomes of FGID patients in a structured multidisciplinary care setting as compared to standard care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Women remain underrepresented in gastroenterology (GI). Studies have identified that a lack of formal mentorship for women contributes to this underrepresentation. While many GI divisions have adopted models for supporting GI fellows and faculty, there is a gap in our knowledge regarding mentorship options for internal medicine (IM) residents interested in GI.To evaluate representation of women at each level of their career (resident, fellow, and attending) and examine trends in representation of women in GI compared to other IM subspecialties.We analyzed AAMC Physician Specialty Data Reports to compare gender representation and growth of women representation across all IM subspecialties and residencies from 2007 to 2021.In 2021, 44.3% of IM residents, 37.8% of GI fellows, and 19.7% of actively practicing attending gastroenterologists were women. Since 2007, GI comprised significantly lower proportions of women attendings except for cardiology, and lower representation in fellows, except for cardiology and nephrology, than other IM subspecialties (p < 0.001). There was a consistently higher proportion of women GI fellows than attendings over the past 14 years (p < 0.01).GI has among the lowest representation of women at each career level compared to other IM subspecialties. Given the previously reported preference of gender congruent mentoring, the underrepresentation of senior academic gastroenterologists who are women may be a contributing factor to lower proportions of women trainees choosing to pursue GI.Aims: Women remain underrepresented in gastroenterology (GI). Studies have identified that a lack of formal mentorship for women contributes to this underrepresentation. While many GI divisions have adopted models for supporting GI fellows and faculty, there is a gap in our knowledge regarding mentorship options for internal medicine (IM) residents interested in GI.To evaluate representation of women at each level of their career (resident, fellow, and attending) and examine trends in representation of women in GI compared to other IM subspecialties.We analyzed AAMC Physician Specialty Data Reports to compare gender representation and growth of women representation across all IM subspecialties and residencies from 2007 to 2021.In 2021, 44.3% of IM residents, 37.8% of GI fellows, and 19.7% of actively practicing attending gastroenterologists were women. Since 2007, GI comprised significantly lower proportions of women attendings except for cardiology, and lower representation in fellows, except for cardiology and nephrology, than other IM subspecialties (p < 0.001). There was a consistently higher proportion of women GI fellows than attendings over the past 14 years (p < 0.01).GI has among the lowest representation of women at each career level compared to other IM subspecialties. Given the previously reported preference of gender congruent mentoring, the underrepresentation of senior academic gastroenterologists who are women may be a contributing factor to lower proportions of women trainees choosing to pursue GI.Methods: Women remain underrepresented in gastroenterology (GI). Studies have identified that a lack of formal mentorship for women contributes to this underrepresentation. While many GI divisions have adopted models for supporting GI fellows and faculty, there is a gap in our knowledge regarding mentorship options for internal medicine (IM) residents interested in GI.To evaluate representation of women at each level of their career (resident, fellow, and attending) and examine trends in representation of women in GI compared to other IM subspecialties.We analyzed AAMC Physician Specialty Data Reports to compare gender representation and growth of women representation across all IM subspecialties and residencies from 2007 to 2021.In 2021, 44.3% of IM residents, 37.8% of GI fellows, and 19.7% of actively practicing attending gastroenterologists were women. Since 2007, GI comprised significantly lower proportions of women attendings except for cardiology, and lower representation in fellows, except for cardiology and nephrology, than other IM subspecialties (p < 0.001). There was a consistently higher proportion of women GI fellows than attendings over the past 14 years (p < 0.01).GI has among the lowest representation of women at each career level compared to other IM subspecialties. Given the previously reported preference of gender congruent mentoring, the underrepresentation of senior academic gastroenterologists who are women may be a contributing factor to lower proportions of women trainees choosing to pursue GI.Results: Women remain underrepresented in gastroenterology (GI). Studies have identified that a lack of formal mentorship for women contributes to this underrepresentation. While many GI divisions have adopted models for supporting GI fellows and faculty, there is a gap in our knowledge regarding mentorship options for internal medicine (IM) residents interested in GI.To evaluate representation of women at each level of their career (resident, fellow, and attending) and examine trends in representation of women in GI compared to other IM subspecialties.We analyzed AAMC Physician Specialty Data Reports to compare gender representation and growth of women representation across all IM subspecialties and residencies from 2007 to 2021.In 2021, 44.3% of IM residents, 37.8% of GI fellows, and 19.7% of actively practicing attending gastroenterologists were women. Since 2007, GI comprised significantly lower proportions of women attendings except for cardiology, and lower representation in fellows, except for cardiology and nephrology, than other IM subspecialties (p < 0.001). There was a consistently higher proportion of women GI fellows than attendings over the past 14 years (p < 0.01).GI has among the lowest representation of women at each career level compared to other IM subspecialties. Given the previously reported preference of gender congruent mentoring, the underrepresentation of senior academic gastroenterologists who are women may be a contributing factor to lower proportions of women trainees choosing to pursue GI.Conclusions: Women remain underrepresented in gastroenterology (GI). Studies have identified that a lack of formal mentorship for women contributes to this underrepresentation. While many GI divisions have adopted models for supporting GI fellows and faculty, there is a gap in our knowledge regarding mentorship options for internal medicine (IM) residents interested in GI.To evaluate representation of women at each level of their career (resident, fellow, and attending) and examine trends in representation of women in GI compared to other IM subspecialties.We analyzed AAMC Physician Specialty Data Reports to compare gender representation and growth of women representation across all IM subspecialties and residencies from 2007 to 2021.In 2021, 44.3% of IM residents, 37.8% of GI fellows, and 19.7% of actively practicing attending gastroenterologists were women. Since 2007, GI comprised significantly lower proportions of women attendings except for cardiology, and lower representation in fellows, except for cardiology and nephrology, than other IM subspecialties (p < 0.001). There was a consistently higher proportion of women GI fellows than attendings over the past 14 years (p < 0.01).GI has among the lowest representation of women at each career level compared to other IM subspecialties. Given the previously reported preference of gender congruent mentoring, the underrepresentation of senior academic gastroenterologists who are women may be a contributing factor to lower proportions of women trainees choosing to pursue GI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The barriers to providing high-quality inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care go beyond educational needs alone to include access to IBD-related resources such as medications, laboratory testing, and multidisciplinary teams. We assessed the needs and resource constraints of physicians caring for Veterans with IBD to inform efforts to improve access to high-quality care.We conducted a national observational survey study in July 2021 of gastroenterologists (GIs) and primary care providers (PCPs) caring for Veterans with IBD within the Veterans Health Administration with the intent of including physicians from all 18 Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN). We reported descriptive statistics and compared responses between gastroenterologists (GIs) and primary care providers (PCPs), practice locations, and years of experience using χ2 tests.Overall, 173 of 2241 eligible physicians completed the survey, representing an individual physician response rate of 7.7% and VISN response rate of 18 out of 18 (100%). We identified several areas of IBD care where GIs and PCPs reported discomfort including medication prescribing, treatment strategies, and special populations. Further, variability in access to IBD services and awareness of the availability of IBD-targeted medications and laboratory tests was common. This survey also highlights the frequency with which PCPs were identified among the highest volume IBD providers in their facility.Variation in GIs’ and PCPs’ comfort with IBD treatment and access to IBD resources is common and needs to be considered in leveraging virtual care and educational programs and managing the expansion of IBD support and resources within VA.Methods: The barriers to providing high-quality inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care go beyond educational needs alone to include access to IBD-related resources such as medications, laboratory testing, and multidisciplinary teams. We assessed the needs and resource constraints of physicians caring for Veterans with IBD to inform efforts to improve access to high-quality care.We conducted a national observational survey study in July 2021 of gastroenterologists (GIs) and primary care providers (PCPs) caring for Veterans with IBD within the Veterans Health Administration with the intent of including physicians from all 18 Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN). We reported descriptive statistics and compared responses between gastroenterologists (GIs) and primary care providers (PCPs), practice locations, and years of experience using χ2 tests.Overall, 173 of 2241 eligible physicians completed the survey, representing an individual physician response rate of 7.7% and VISN response rate of 18 out of 18 (100%). We identified several areas of IBD care where GIs and PCPs reported discomfort including medication prescribing, treatment strategies, and special populations. Further, variability in access to IBD services and awareness of the availability of IBD-targeted medications and laboratory tests was common. This survey also highlights the frequency with which PCPs were identified among the highest volume IBD providers in their facility.Variation in GIs’ and PCPs’ comfort with IBD treatment and access to IBD resources is common and needs to be considered in leveraging virtual care and educational programs and managing the expansion of IBD support and resources within VA.Results: The barriers to providing high-quality inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care go beyond educational needs alone to include access to IBD-related resources such as medications, laboratory testing, and multidisciplinary teams. We assessed the needs and resource constraints of physicians caring for Veterans with IBD to inform efforts to improve access to high-quality care.We conducted a national observational survey study in July 2021 of gastroenterologists (GIs) and primary care providers (PCPs) caring for Veterans with IBD within the Veterans Health Administration with the intent of including physicians from all 18 Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN). We reported descriptive statistics and compared responses between gastroenterologists (GIs) and primary care providers (PCPs), practice locations, and years of experience using χ2 tests.Overall, 173 of 2241 eligible physicians completed the survey, representing an individual physician response rate of 7.7% and VISN response rate of 18 out of 18 (100%). We identified several areas of IBD care where GIs and PCPs reported discomfort including medication prescribing, treatment strategies, and special populations. Further, variability in access to IBD services and awareness of the availability of IBD-targeted medications and laboratory tests was common. This survey also highlights the frequency with which PCPs were identified among the highest volume IBD providers in their facility.Variation in GIs’ and PCPs’ comfort with IBD treatment and access to IBD resources is common and needs to be considered in leveraging virtual care and educational programs and managing the expansion of IBD support and resources within VA.Conclusions: The barriers to providing high-quality inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care go beyond educational needs alone to include access to IBD-related resources such as medications, laboratory testing, and multidisciplinary teams. We assessed the needs and resource constraints of physicians caring for Veterans with IBD to inform efforts to improve access to high-quality care.We conducted a national observational survey study in July 2021 of gastroenterologists (GIs) and primary care providers (PCPs) caring for Veterans with IBD within the Veterans Health Administration with the intent of including physicians from all 18 Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN). We reported descriptive statistics and compared responses between gastroenterologists (GIs) and primary care providers (PCPs), practice locations, and years of experience using χ2 tests.Overall, 173 of 2241 eligible physicians completed the survey, representing an individual physician response rate of 7.7% and VISN response rate of 18 out of 18 (100%). We identified several areas of IBD care where GIs and PCPs reported discomfort including medication prescribing, treatment strategies, and special populations. Further, variability in access to IBD services and awareness of the availability of IBD-targeted medications and laboratory tests was common. This survey also highlights the frequency with which PCPs were identified among the highest volume IBD providers in their facility.Variation in GIs’ and PCPs’ comfort with IBD treatment and access to IBD resources is common and needs to be considered in leveraging virtual care and educational programs and managing the expansion of IBD support and resources within VA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To develop and validate tools for measuring inpatient gastroenterology (GI) consultation quality on oncologic patients.A total of 145 inpatient GI consults were analyzed using electronic health records in this cross-sectional study. Essential Consult Elements on oncologic-hospitalized patients (EE-COH) and Hospitalized Oncologic Patients Enhanced Quality of Consult Assessment Tool (HOPE-QCAT) were used for grading. Interrater reliability was assessed.Both EE-COH and HOPE-QCAT showed near-perfect interrater reliability across most measures in the validation cohort. On application of these measures for quality assessment, basic evaluation by the requesting hospitalist was partially complete in 24.8%, the request for GI consultation was inappropriate in 18.6%, while the rationale for recommended studies from the GI consultant was provided in 55.7% of cases suggesting key areas for quality improvement.We developed highly reliable quality measures for inpatient GI consults on oncology patients. The EE-COH and HOPE-QCAT tools can be utilized in future studies of inpatient GI consult quality and to form the basis for interventions to improve communication between consultants and hospitalists. Such tools could be adapted for inpatient quality assessment across other specialties and settings.Methods: To develop and validate tools for measuring inpatient gastroenterology (GI) consultation quality on oncologic patients.A total of 145 inpatient GI consults were analyzed using electronic health records in this cross-sectional study. Essential Consult Elements on oncologic-hospitalized patients (EE-COH) and Hospitalized Oncologic Patients Enhanced Quality of Consult Assessment Tool (HOPE-QCAT) were used for grading. Interrater reliability was assessed.Both EE-COH and HOPE-QCAT showed near-perfect interrater reliability across most measures in the validation cohort. On application of these measures for quality assessment, basic evaluation by the requesting hospitalist was partially complete in 24.8%, the request for GI consultation was inappropriate in 18.6%, while the rationale for recommended studies from the GI consultant was provided in 55.7% of cases suggesting key areas for quality improvement.We developed highly reliable quality measures for inpatient GI consults on oncology patients. The EE-COH and HOPE-QCAT tools can be utilized in future studies of inpatient GI consult quality and to form the basis for interventions to improve communication between consultants and hospitalists. Such tools could be adapted for inpatient quality assessment across other specialties and settings.Results: To develop and validate tools for measuring inpatient gastroenterology (GI) consultation quality on oncologic patients.A total of 145 inpatient GI consults were analyzed using electronic health records in this cross-sectional study. Essential Consult Elements on oncologic-hospitalized patients (EE-COH) and Hospitalized Oncologic Patients Enhanced Quality of Consult Assessment Tool (HOPE-QCAT) were used for grading. Interrater reliability was assessed.Both EE-COH and HOPE-QCAT showed near-perfect interrater reliability across most measures in the validation cohort. On application of these measures for quality assessment, basic evaluation by the requesting hospitalist was partially complete in 24.8%, the request for GI consultation was inappropriate in 18.6%, while the rationale for recommended studies from the GI consultant was provided in 55.7% of cases suggesting key areas for quality improvement.We developed highly reliable quality measures for inpatient GI consults on oncology patients. The EE-COH and HOPE-QCAT tools can be utilized in future studies of inpatient GI consult quality and to form the basis for interventions to improve communication between consultants and hospitalists. Such tools could be adapted for inpatient quality assessment across other specialties and settings.Conclusion: To develop and validate tools for measuring inpatient gastroenterology (GI) consultation quality on oncologic patients.A total of 145 inpatient GI consults were analyzed using electronic health records in this cross-sectional study. Essential Consult Elements on oncologic-hospitalized patients (EE-COH) and Hospitalized Oncologic Patients Enhanced Quality of Consult Assessment Tool (HOPE-QCAT) were used for grading. Interrater reliability was assessed.Both EE-COH and HOPE-QCAT showed near-perfect interrater reliability across most measures in the validation cohort. On application of these measures for quality assessment, basic evaluation by the requesting hospitalist was partially complete in 24.8%, the request for GI consultation was inappropriate in 18.6%, while the rationale for recommended studies from the GI consultant was provided in 55.7% of cases suggesting key areas for quality improvement.We developed highly reliable quality measures for inpatient GI consults on oncology patients. The EE-COH and HOPE-QCAT tools can be utilized in future studies of inpatient GI consult quality and to form the basis for interventions to improve communication between consultants and hospitalists. Such tools could be adapted for inpatient quality assessment across other specialties and settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gastroenterologists are frequently consulted for evaluation feeding tube placement, or for management of complications in an existing feeding tube. Though a frequent topic of consultation for GI Fellows, there are few comprehensive resources for feeding tube placement and troubleshooting available. In this review, we discuss different types of feeding tubes, when each should be considered, and various methods and techniques for placement. Considerations for when one type, method, technique, or specialty may be preferred over the other will be discussed. Additionally, we discuss management of the many complications of indwelling feeding tubes. Our goal is to create a comprehensive review for gastroenterologists to cover clinically relevant questions related to feeding tube placement and management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Multiple studies have indicated physicians are practicing medicine in increasingly larger groups. However, specialty-specific data on the extent of consolidation are lacking for many specialties, including gastroenterology. We aim to determine the extent of consolidation for gastroenterology in recent years. Methods: The Physician Compare database was used to gather information at both an individual and group level. This information included location and number of providers for each group. Cochran-Armitage tests were used to test for differences between practice sizes in 2012 and 2020. Results: Between 2012 and 2020, the number of physicians increased from 12,766 to 13,934, while the total number of practices decreased from 4517 to 3865. The total number of physicians who practice in groups of less than 9 physicians decreased by 23.9%, while the total number of physicians in practices of 100 + increased by 16.8%. Discussion: Significant consolidation has occurred in the field of gastroenterology in every geographic region of the USA. The causes of consolidation are multi-faceted and include the legislative environment, private equity and hospital acquisition of private groups, individual physician lifestyle preferences, and economic benefits of economies of scale. However, the consequences of consolidation are still unclear. Conclusion: Over the last eight years, gastroenterologists have been practicing in increasingly larger groups. This trend has been consistent in each area of the country. Future research should focus on the impact of consolidation on patient care and physician wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Performing colonoscopy can be technically challenging in female patients. Female patients may prefer having a female endoscopist. This preference, coupled with the fact that there are fewer female endoscopists, may result in gender differences in colonoscopy practice. We hypothesized that the duration of female colonoscopy is longer and that female endoscopists perform a higher proportion of female colonoscopy than male colleagues. We explored the potential revenue implications of gender differences in screening colonoscopy. Methods: We analyzed procedure time and gender differences in 16,573 screening colonoscopies performed by 27 male and 7 female endoscopists over a three-year period in one large academic practice. We modeled the potential revenue impacts of differences in procedure duration, proportion of female colonoscopy and the frequency of detected adenomas. Results: We found that screening colonoscopy takes 8.8% more time to complete in female patients compared to male patients for all endoscopists (p < 0.001), and that female endoscopists perform an average of 71.2% female exams compared to male endoscopists, who perform an average of 50.8% female exams (p < 0.001). Female patients had a lower detection adenoma rate (ADR), reducing the frequency of polypectomy and reimbursement in an RVU model. The observed gender differences could account for an estimated 9.6% revenue loss per 8-h session for a female gastroenterologist performing screening colonoscopy compared to a male counterpart. Conclusion: Longer colonoscopy duration in females, increased proportion of female colonoscopies for female endoscopists and lower ADR in females may contribute to the gender gap in physician pay in gastroenterology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Though there are an increasing number of female medical graduates, women remain underrepresented in academic medicine. There have been several reasons to explain this gender disparity, including marital status, number of children, number of hours worked, job flexibility, perceptions of women as inferior leaders, gender bias, sexual harassment, and unsupportive academic climates. Aims: This study aimed to investigate the relationship between scholarly productivity and the representation of female gastroenterologists in academia. Specifically, scholarly productivity measured by the h-index and academic rank were explored to determine if there were gender disparities in academic productivity and rank in gastroenterology. Methods: Gastroenterology departmental listings were obtained from the Fellowship and Residency Interactive Database of the American Medical Association. The Scopus database was used to record each physician's h-index. Statistical analyses were conducted with Wilcoxon rank-sum test, which compared matched samples by academic rank, and ANOVA tests, which compared multiple academic ranks. Results: Out of 1703 academic gastroenterologists, women account for 25% of academic physicians. Women have statistically lower h-indices at the level of Assistant Professor (p = 0.0012), and at the level of Chair (p = 0.01). There was no difference in h-indices between male and female at the rank of Associate Professor and Professor. Conclusions: While these results mirror patterns appreciated in other fields of medicine, the results at the rank of Chair may suggest that despite the lower h-index compared to their male counterparts, females are perceived as having strong inherent leadership skills outside of academic productivity that are also conducive to leading a department and may be contributing to their rise to Chair. Keywords: gender gap; academic gastroenterologists; scholarly productivity; academic rank; H-index. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), pancreatic duct stenting, and intensive intravenous hydration have been proven to prevent post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. Trial participation and guideline changes demanded an assessment of the clinical practice of post-ERCP pancreatitis prophylaxis. Aims: The surveys aim to identify points of improvement to inform and educate ERCPists about current evidence-based practice. Methods: Two anonymous surveys were conducted among Dutch gastroenterologists in 2013 (n = 408) and 2020 (n = 575) for longitudinal views and attitudes pertaining to post-ERCP pancreatitis prophylaxis and recognition of post-ERCP pancreatitis risk factors. Results: In 2013 and 2020, respectively, 121 and 109 ERCPists responded. In the 2013 survey, 98% of them utilized NSAID prophylaxis and 62% pancreatic duct stent prophylaxis in specific cases. In the 2020 survey, the use of NSAIDs (100%), pancreatic duct stents (78%), and intensive intravenous hydration (33%) increased among ERCPists. NSAID prophylaxis was the preferred prophylactic measure for all risk factors in the 2020 survey, except for ampullectomy, pancreatic duct contrast injection, and pancreatic duct cannulation, for which NSAID prophylaxis and pancreatic duct stent combined was equally favored or preferred. Conclusion: Rectal NSAIDs are the most applied post-ERCP pancreatitis prophylaxis in the Netherlands, followed by pancreatic duct stents and intensive intravenous hydration. Additionally, there is reason to believe that recent guideline updates and active research participation have led to increased prophylaxis implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is wide variation in the quality of care of hospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Prior studies have demonstrated that a specialized inpatient IBD service improves short-term outcomes. In this study, we assessed the impact of a dedicated IBD service on the quality of care and long-term outcomes. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients admitted for a complication of IBD between March 2017 and February 2019 to a tertiary referral center. In March 2018, a dedicated inpatient IBD service co-managed by IBD gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons was implemented. Quality of care outcomes included C. difficile stool testing, confirmed VTE prophylaxis administration and opiate avoidance. Long-term outcomes were clinical remission, IBD-related surgery, ED visits, and hospital readmissions at 90 days and 12 months. Results: In total, 143 patients were included; 66 pre- and 77 post-implementation of the IBD service. Fifty-two percent had ulcerative colitis and 48% had Crohn's disease. After implementation, there was improvement in C.difficile testing (90% vs. 76%, P = 0.04), early VTE prophylaxis (92% vs. 77%, P = 0.01) and decreases in narcotic use (14% vs. 30%, P = 0.02), IBD-related ED visits at 90 days (7% vs 18%, P = 0.03) and 12 months (16% vs 30%, P = 0.04), and IBD readmissions at 90 days (16% vs. 30%, P = 0.04). There were no differences in rates of clinical remission or surgery. Conclusions: The creation of a dedicated inpatient IBD service improved quality of IBD care and reduced post-discharge ED visits and readmissions and broader implementation of this strategy may help optimize care of hospitalized IBD patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: Inflammatory bowel disease epidemiology; Inflammatory bowel disease outcomes; Inflammatory bowel disease risk factors EN Inflammatory bowel disease epidemiology Inflammatory bowel disease outcomes Inflammatory bowel disease risk factors 4071 4072 2 10/16/23 20231101 NES 231101 The prevalence of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is rising globally, with recent estimates citing 6-8 million people affected worldwide [[1]]. Knowledge of resource distribution is essential for the assessment of IBD healthcare disparities, particularly since rural residence is associated with fewer gastroenterology visits and increased healthcare utilization for IBD-related events [[4], [10]]. Inflammatory bowel disease epidemiology, Inflammatory bowel disease outcomes, Inflammatory bowel disease risk factors. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Anemia is a common systemic complication of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and is associated with worse disease outcomes, quality of life, and higher healthcare costs. Aims: The purpose of this study was to determine how anemia severity impacts healthcare resource utilization and if treatment of anemia was associated with reduced utilization and costs. Methods: Retrospective chart review of adult patients managed by gastroenterology between 2014 and 2018 at a tertiary referral center. Results: The records of 1763 patients with IBD were included in the analysis, with 966 (55%) patients with CD, 799 (44%) with UC, and 18 (1%) with unspecified IBD. Of these patients, 951 (54%) had anemia. Patients with anemia had significantly more hospitalizations, increased length of stays, more ER, GI, and PCP visits, as well as higher costs when compared to patients with IBD without anemia. Patients with more severe anemia had more healthcare utilization and incurred even higher total costs. Treatment with IV or oral iron did not lower overall utilization or costs, when compared to patients with anemia who did not receive treatment (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that the presence of anemia is correlated with increased resource utilization in patients with IBD, with increase in anemia severity associated with higher utilization and costs. Anemia has been associated with increased disease activity and could represent a marker of more severe disease, possibly explaining these associations. Our results suggest that treating anemia is associated with increased resource utilization; however, further research is needed to investigate this relationship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, social media has transformed how we as gastroenterologists communicate with each other and has grown into an arena of knowledge and peer support for patients. Gastroenterologists commonly use social media for education networking, patient populations use social media for peer support and advocacy, but little is known about how gastroenterologists can use social media to conduct thoughtful and rigorous patient-centered research. Therefore, we aim to introduce the scope of social media research, highlight prominent examples in gastroenterology, and review innovative opportunities and unique challenges to using and studying social media for research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bone density screening (DEXA) and vitamin D serum assay (Vit-D) are recommended in chronic pancreatitis, but adherence by providers is unknown. Aims: Assess DEXA/Vit-D testing according to provider type. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of chronic pancreatitis patients followed in a tertiary hospital (August 2017–2018) was conducted. Provider type was primary care (PCP), gastroenterologist, and pancreas specialist. Chi-square test and multivariable analysis were conducted to assess the relation between provider type and DEXA/Vit-D testing. Subset analyses were performed among patients with fecal elastase < 200 mcg/g. Results: A total of 478 charts were reviewed, and 256 (53.6%) met diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis; 184 (71.9%) definite, 45 (17.6%) probable, and 27 (10.6%) borderline chronic pancreatitis. DEXA was tested in 112/256 (43%) patients; 16/57(28%) patients followed by PCP, 11/38 (28.9%) by gastroenterologists, and 85/161(52.2%) by pancreas specialists (p = 0.001). Vit-D was tested in 210/256 (82.0%) patients; 42/57(73.7%) followed by PCP, 29/38 (76.3%) by gastroenterologists, and 139/161(86.3%) by pancreas specialists (p = 0.06). Multivariate analysis assessing DEXA/Vit-D testing showed pancreas specialists were more likely to test compared to PCP (DEXA: OR 3.70, CI 1.77–7.74, p = 0.001. Vit-D: OR 3.24, CI 1.43–7.38, p = 0.005), but gastroenterologists were not. In patients with low fecal elastase, pancreas specialists were more likely to test DEXA (pancreas specialists: 62.1%, PCP: 40.0%, Gastroenterologists: 11.1%, p = 0.01) and all patients received Vit-D testing. Conclusions: Chronic pancreatitis patients often do not receive optimal preventive care. Pancreas specialists were more likely to perform DEXA and Vit-D testing compared to PCP and gastroenterologists. More physician education is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is likely variation in approach and management of patient with EoE due to lack of standardized care and variation in guidelines. We aimed to identify current practices regarding diagnosis and treatment in children with eosinophillic esophagitis (EoE) in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ). Methods: Information on current diagnostic and management approaches for pediatric EoE was collected via an online survey sent to pediatric gastroenterologists (pGE) in ANZ. We performed a cross-sectional study of pGE using a 49-question instrument regarding evaluation, diagnostic, and therapeutic aspects of EoE between October 2019 and December 2019. Results: Eighty-five percent of the survey responders were from Australia, and 66% were academic. 30% pGE perform > 3 esophageal biopsies for diagnosis of EoE, 40% involve an allergist, 30% use a twice daily PPI trial, and 70% do not exclude other cause of esophageal eosinophilia. For management, only 3% use dietary elimination as an initial therapy, and 24% use less than the recommended doses of swallowed fluticasone. Forty-nine percent were likely to stop treatment in after remission is achieved for 12 months. The EoE endoscopic reference score (EREFS) was not routinely used (49%). Two-thirds of pGE are concerned about long-term effects of recurrent need of general anesthesia. Conclusions: Diagnostic and management strategies for EoE differed widely among pGE in ANZ, including in diagnostic biopsies, assessing competing causes of esophageal eosinophilia, initials selection of treatments, and maintenance strategies. This variability likely reflects continued uncertainty regarding optimal management strategies and stresses the need for pediatric-specific ANZ guidelines to standardize EoE care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) are associated with considerable direct healthcare costs. There have been few comprehensive analyses of all IBD- and non-IBD comorbidities that determine direct costs in this population. Methods: We used data from a validated cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Total healthcare costs were estimated as a sum of costs associated with IBD-related hospitalizations and surgery, imaging (CT or MR scans), outpatient visits, endoscopic evaluation, and emergency room (ER) care. All ICD-9 codes were extracted for each patient and clustered into 1804 distinct phecode clusters representing individual phenotypes. A phenome-wide association analysis (PheWAS) was performed using logistic regression to identify predictors of being in the top decile of costs. Results: Our cohort is comprised of 10,721 patients with IBD among whom 50% had CD. The median age was 46 years. The median total cost per patient is $11,203 (IQR $2396–30,563). The strongest association with total healthcare costs was intestinal obstruction without mention of hernia (p = 5.93 × 10−156) and other intestinal obstruction (p = 9.24 × 10−131). In addition, strong associations were observed for symptoms consistent with severity of IBD including the presence of fluid–electrolyte imbalance (p = 1.90 × 10−130), hypovolemia (p = 1.65 × 10−114), abdominal pain (p = 7.29 × 10−60), and anemia (p = 1.90–10−83). Cardiopulmonary diseases and psychological comorbidity also demonstrated significant associations with total costs with the latter being more strongly associated with ER visit-related costs. Conclusions: Surrogate markers suggesting possible irreversible bowel damage and active disease demonstrate the greatest influence on IBD-related healthcare costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of screening colonoscopy is to reduce the burden of colorectal cancer (CRC), one of the most common causes of cancer-related death in the world. They hypothesized that the duration of a typical colonoscopy in a female patient is longer and that female endoscopists are more likely to perform colonoscopies on females than their male colleagues. Prioritizing a financial compensation model governing colonoscopies that adjusts for providers managing female patients could have unpredicted and unwanted consequences such as adding unnecessary colonoscopies in women and disincentivizing male colonoscopies, while the latter group is at higher risk for developing CRC. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a diagnostic/therapeutic endoscopic procedure for numerous pancreaticobiliary diseases. Data regarding performing ERCP on weekend (WE; Saturday/Sunday) versus postponing ERCP to first two available weekdays (WD; Monday/Tuesday) are scarce. ERCP requires costly resources including specialized nurses, endoscopy room equipped with fluoroscopy, anesthesia services, and highly trained therapeutic endoscopists. Hospitals frequently do not have these resources readily available during WE, leading to postponing ERCPs to WD. Aims: This study analyzes the effect of performing ERCP on WE versus postponement to WD on hospital efficiency, and on patient safety/outcomes. Methods: A computerized search of electronic medical records, January 2011–December 2016, at four Beaumont Hospitals retrospectively identified all gastroenterology consults performed on Friday or Saturday before 12:00 noon, which resulted in ERCP performed for any indication on WE versus postponing ERCP to WD. Length of stay (LOS), hospital costs, hospital charges, and hospital reimbursements were compared between both groups, as were quality of care measures. Results: Among 5196 patients undergoing ERCPs, 533 patients were identified, including 315 patients in the WE group and 218 patients in the WD group. Comparing WE versus WD groups, median LOS was shorter (4.5 days vs. 6.9 days, p < 0.0001); median hospital costs were less ($9208 vs. $11,657, p < 0.0001); and median hospital charges were less ($28,026 vs. $37,899, p < 0.0001). Median hospital reimbursements were not significantly different in WE versus WD groups ($10,277 vs. $10,362, p = 0.65). Median hospital charges were lower than median hospital reimbursements (net profit) in WE but not in WD. WE versus WD had no significant differences in morbidity, mortality, ≤ 30-day readmission rates, need for repeat ERCP ≤ 30 days, or post-ERCP complications. Limitations: This is a retrospective study. Conclusions: Performing ERCPs during weekends significantly reduced LOS, hospital costs, and hospital charges compared to postponing ERCP to WD and resulted in net hospital profits, without impairing quality of medical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Providing sedation for patients undergoing gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy continues to be a debated topic in both anesthesia and gastroenterology circles. Sedation approaches are widely varied across the globe. While propofol administration is embraced by more endoscopists and patients, its administration evolves controversy. Whereas trained nurses and gastroenterologists are allowed to administer propofol for GI endoscopy sedation in Europe and Asia, it is the sole privilege of anesthesia providers in the USA. However, the costs of anesthesia providers are significant and threaten to derail the screening colonoscopy practice. Efforts were made by both drug and device manufacturers to find alternatives. Fospropofol was one such effort that did not live up to the expectations due to respiratory depressant properties that were similar to propofol. Use of a new tool to administer propofol in the form of Sedasys® was the next experiment that tried to find alternative to anesthesia providers. The device did not succeed due to inadequate sedation. The latest effort is remimazolam, a new benzodiazepine that has quicker recovery profile. In the interim, many drug combinations such as propofol–dexmedetomidine and propofol–ketamine are improving the safety without compromising the quality of sedation. This review attempts to discuss the new drug innovations and drug combinations of existing sedatives for the benefit of readers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the work-life pattern and prevalence of occupation-related symptoms, as well as the effect of work-life balance on health status according to age and sex among Korean gastroenterologists.Methods: A total of 222 gastroenterologists from 44 nationwide centers in South Korea participated in an anonymized self-responded electronic questionnaire survey about their daily activities and symptoms for 14 days. Musculoskeletal, gastrointestinal and mental symptoms were scored using a numerical scale. The Maslach Burnout Inventory was used to measure the burnout score.Results: Korean gastroenterologists (124 men and 98 women) spent 71.5 ± 19.0 h/week for work (54.0 ± 16.2 in-hospital and 17.5 ± 9.5 out-of-hospital), without any differences regarding sex. However, women spent more time performing housework and parenting (20.7 ± 19.0) compared to men (14.3 ± 13.3, P = 0.007). Musculoskeletal pain was found in 199 respondents (89.6%), and women had a higher total pain score compared to men in all age groups (P = 0.016). Gastrointestinal and mental symptoms were found in 119 (53.6%) and 153 (68.9%), respectively. Work-life ratio was significantly correlated with musculoskeletal (P < 0.001), gastrointestinal (P = 0.048) and mental symptoms (P = 0.003). Using the Maslach Burnout Inventory, 64.4% of the respondents demonstrated burnout. Moreover, emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and personal accomplishment scores were worst in women in their 30s or 40s.Conclusion: Korean gastroenterologists suffered from musculoskeletal, gastrointestinal and mental symptoms and were highly prone to burnout due to long and laboring work. Work-life imbalance and burnout were most severe in young women doctors due to their domestic demands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Computer-assisted propofol sedation (CAPS) allows non-anesthesiologists to administer propofol for gastrointestinal procedures in relatively healthy patients. As the first US medical center to adopt CAPS technology for routine clinical use, we report our 1-year experience with CAPS for esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD).Methods: Between September 2014 and August 2015, 926 outpatients underwent elective EGDs with CAPS at our center. All EGDs were performed by 1 of 17 gastroenterologists certified in the use of CAPS. Procedural success rates, procedure times, and recovery times were compared against corresponding historical controls done with midazolam and fentanyl sedation from September 2013 to August 2014. Adverse events in CAPS patients were recorded.Results: The mean age of the CAPS cohort was 56.7 years (45% male); 16.2% of the EGDs were for variceal screening or Barrett's surveillance and 83.8% for symptoms. The procedural success rates were similar to that of historical controls (99.0% vs. 99.3%; p = 0.532); procedure times were also similar (6.6 vs. 7.4 min; p = 0.280), but recovery time was markedly shorter (31.7 vs. 52.4 min; p < 0.001). There were 11 (1.2%) cases of mild transient oxygen desaturation (< 90%), 15 (1.6%) cases of marked agitation due to undersedation, and 1 case of asymptomatic hypotension. In addition, there were six (0.6%) patients with more pronounced desaturation episodes that required brief (< 1 min) mask ventilation. There were no other serious adverse events.Conclusions: CAPS appears to be a safe, effective, and efficient means of providing sedation for EGD in healthy patients. Recovery times were much shorter than historical controls. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Identification of Lynch syndrome (LS) followed by annual/biannual surveillance colonoscopy markedly reduces the risk of developing new colorectal cancer (CRC) among those with LS.Aims: (1) To determine the current practice of identifying LS in the USA and Canada, and current surveillance and management practices for those diagnosed with LS; (2) to determine whether variances in current practice are physician/region dependent or influenced by ease of access to specialist clinics.Methods: An online survey request was sent to practicing gastroenterologists through the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and the American College of Gastroenterology. Fisher's exact tests were performed to determine the factors associated with screening for LS and separately for follow-up, surveillance, and management.Results: A total of 249 participants were recruited, of which 237 were gastroenterologists and included in the analysis. Less than one-third of practicing gastroenterologists indicated that their CRC patients were undergoing screening tests to identify LS. While 42% (65/153) of participants from the USA stated that their patients were undergoing universal LS screening (i.e., among all diagnosed with CRC), only 12% (6/49) of participants from Canada reported this practice (p < 0.001). There was no difference in reported practice between the physicians that do and do not have access to hereditary clinics (35% vs. 34% testing; p = 0.54). Appropriate surveillance interval to look for CRC in patients with LS was recommended by most.Conclusion: This survey suggests there is a significant difference in practice between Canada and the USA in regard to identification of LS, with suboptimal practice throughout North America. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Traditionally, early esophageal cancer (i.e., cancer limited to the mucosa or superficial submucosa) was managed surgically; the gastroenterologist's role was primarily to diagnose the tumor. Over the last decade, advances in endoscopic imaging, ablation, and resection techniques have resulted in a paradigm shift-diagnosis, staging, treatment, and surveillance are within the endoscopist's domain. Yet, there are few reviews that provide a focused, evidence-based approach to early esophageal cancer, and highlight areas of controversy for practicing gastroenterologists. In this manuscript, we will discuss the following: (1) utility of novel endoscopic technologies to identify high-grade dysplasia and early esophageal cancer, (2) role of endoscopic resection and imaging to stage early esophageal cancer, (3) endoscopic therapies for early esophageal cancer, and (4) indications for surgical and multidisciplinary management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On the other hand, when considering the 952 patients who had at least one advanced adenoma identified during the initial exam, 143 patients had additional advanced adenomas at the second colonoscopy for a per patient AAMR of 13%. We have data [[2]] indicating that a 9-min withdrawal time vs. the standard 6-min withdrawal time (excluding polypectomy time) significantly reduces the adenoma miss rate (AMR; 14.6% vs. 36.6%) and the advanced adenoma miss rate (AAMR; 5.3% vs. 46.9%). 22763141 6 Baik S, Park H, Park J. Advanced colonic neoplasia at follow-up colonoscopy according to risk components and adenoma location at index colonoscopy: a retrospective study of 1,974 asymptomatic Koreans. [Extracted from the article]

I knew that caring for complex chronically ill patients would require a team effort, so I formed our IBD Program at Yale in 2005. By this time, I was seeing more and more patients with IBD and enjoying caring for them, so I decided to focus on this disease and hand over my liver patients and ERCPs to my colleagues who were better at managing these patients than I was. A general gastroenterologist could treat IBD patients. I began as a general physician and over the subsequent 40 years have narrowed my focus to manage a limited set of patients, e.g., those who have inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). [Extracted from the article]

As healthcare costs related to inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) rise, there is an increasing need to identify hospital characteristics that promote cost-effective care while minimizing adverse outcomes for this complex population. Cost effectiveness could be compared among teaching hospitals with specialized IBD physicians and surgeons, teaching hospitals without specialized IBD providers, and nonteaching hospitals. [Extracted from the article]

Introduction: Recent studies have demonstrated that the protective effect of colonoscopy against colorectal cancer is lower in the proximal colon. Proximal serrated polyps, including sessile serrated adenomas and proximal hyperplastic polyps, can be frequently missed and pose a risk of interval cancers.Aim: To investigate the overall adenoma detection rate (ADR) and the proximal serrated polyp detection rate (PSPDR) among academic gastroenterologists, community gastroenterologists, and colorectal surgeons from a single institution, all of whom have received formal training in colonoscopy during their fellowship.Methods: All complete screening colonoscopies for patients aged 50 or older with a good to excellent bowel preparation performed by different endoscopists at Medstar Washington Hospital Center (Washington, DC) from July 2015 to December 2017 were reviewed. Pathology reports of the resected polyps were manually reviewed.Results: A total of 2850 screening colonoscopies meeting the inclusion criteria were performed by 18 endoscopists (6 academic, 7 community, and 5 colorectal surgeons). There was no significant difference in the mean ADR among the three groups of endoscopists: academic gastroenterologists, community gastroenterologists, and colorectal surgeons (40.3% vs 36.0% vs 39.6%, respectively). However, academic gastroenterologists had a significantly higher PSPDR compared to community gastroenterologists or colorectal surgeons (12.3% vs 5.4% vs 4.5%, respectively, ANOVA p = 0.006).Conclusion: Our novel data show that academic gastroenterologists had a significantly higher PSPDR compared to community gastroenterologists or colorectal surgeons despite a comparable overall ADR among the three groups. PSPDR may be considered as an important quality indicator for colonoscopy, apart from ADR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Fluoroscopy use during ERCP exposes patients and providers to deleterious effects of radiation. Formal training in fluoroscopy/radiation protection is not widely emphasized during therapeutic endoscopy training, and radiation use during GI endoscopy has not previously been characterized in the USA. In this study, we evaluated radiation training, fluoroscopy use patterns, and radiation protection practices among US therapeutic endoscopists.Methods: An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to US therapeutic endoscopists, and responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. State-specific requirements for fluoroscopy utilization were determined from state radiologic health branches.Results: A total of 159 endoscopists (response rate 67.8%) predominantly those working in university hospitals (69.2%) with > 5 years of experience performing ERCP (74.9%) completed the questionnaire. Although the majority of endoscopists (61.6%) reported that they personally controlled fluoroscopy during ERCP, most (56.6%) had not received training on operating their fluoroscopy system. Only a minority (18-31%) of all respondents reported consistently utilizing modifiable fluoroscopy system parameters that minimize patient radiation exposure (pulsed fluoroscopy, frame rate modification or collimation). Endoscopists appear to undertake adequate personal radiation protective measures although use of a dosimeter was not consistent in half of respondents. The majority of states (56.8%) do not have any stated requirement for certification of non-radiologist physicians who intend to operate fluoroscopy.Conclusions: Most US gastroenterologists performing ERCP have not received formal training in operating their fluoroscopy system or in minimizing radiation exposure to themselves and to their patients. Such formal training should be included in all therapeutic endoscopy training programs, and fluoroscopy system-specific training should be offered at all hospitals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Current guidelines recommend starting colorectal cancer (CRC) surveillance 8-10 years after inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) onset. Recent studies report that the incidence of CRC within 8-10 years of IBD onset (i.e., early CRC) ranges from 12 to 42%.Aims: To describe the current prevalence of early CRC in a tertiary care center IBD cohort with CRC and to identify associated risk factors.Methods: We performed a single-center observational study of IBD patients diagnosed with CRC from 2005 to 2015. We compared characteristics of patients with early CRC (diagnosis of CRC within 8 years of initial IBD onset) to those with CRC diagnosed later in their IBD course.Results: Ninety-three patients met inclusion criteria. Eleven (11.8%) patients developed CRC within 8 years of initial IBD onset. On multivariable logistic regression, age greater than 28 at IBD onset (adjusted OR 12.0; 95% CI 2.30, 62.75) and tobacco use (adjusted OR 8.52; 95% CI 1.38, 52.82) were significant predictors of early CRC. A validation cohort confirmed calibration and discrimination of the model.Conclusions: One out of every eight IBD patients with CRC developed their malignancy prior to the currently recommended timeframe for the initiation of surveillance colonoscopy. IBD onset at 28 years or older and tobacco use were identified as predictors of early CRC. Early CRC should be considered in discussions of cancer surveillance in this population. Prospective cohort studies are necessary to further analyze the impact of early CRC in IBD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: IBD patients with inadequately treated disease often relapse and require hospitalizations for further management. The purpose of this practice review was to determine whether personalized IBD care improved patient outcomes as measured by IBD-related hospitalizations.Methods: A dedicated IBD clinic was created for personalized patient care in a tertiary veterans health care center in 2014. In the first year, the care program consisted of patient-centered medical home (PCMH). In the second year, personalized biologic therapy was incorporated into the program, based on the severity of mucosal barrier dysfunction measured by probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) analysis of the terminal ileum during colonoscopy. IBD-related hospitalizations during these 2 years were compared to the year before the care program.Results: The IBD-related admissions at baseline, year 1 and 2 of the program were: total number of admissions of 25, 24, 8 (P = 0.03) per year, total number of hospital days of 177, 144, 31 days per year (P < 0.01), median length of stay 7, 4, and 2 days per visit (P = 0.013), respectively. Patients had significant increases in serum hemoglobin (11.5 ± 2.7, 11.9 ± 2.6, 14.0 ± 1.4 g/dl; P = 0.035), albumin (2.7 ± 0.7, 3.0 ± 0.6 g/dl 3.7 ± 0.8 g/dl; P = 0.031) and body mass index (26.6 ± 2.9, 28.1 ± 5.9; 34.0 ± 10.8; P = 0.047).Conclusions: Personalized IBD care incorporating a PCMH model and tailored biologic therapy based on pCLE findings of mucosal barrier dysfunction significantly reduced IBD-related hospitalizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Burnout is a critical issue among physicians, including gastroenterologists. Up to 50% of gastroenterologists have reported symptoms of burnout in national assessments, leading to increased recognition of the burden of burnout among subspecialty societies. Particularly alarming in these assessments of burnout is the suggestion of increased rates of burnout among trainees and early career gastroenterologists. In this article, we describe the scope of burnout among young gastroenterologists and the risk factors that contribute. In addition, we will offer practical solutions to reduce burnout based on insights developed from multidisciplinary approaches, including relevant burnout literature, organizational approaches within academic medical centers, and training programs, as well as interviews with successful private practice gastroenterologists, and leaders in the fields of business and education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is cost-effective and prevents death from CRC if used appropriately. Physicians do not recommend CRC screening according to guidelines. Physician-related factors associated with CRC screening knowledge are unknown.Aims: We tested the accuracy of CRC screening knowledge in a nationwide cohort of practicing and trainee physicians and assessed respondent's interest in a mobile app to improve appropriate CRC screening use.Methods: An electronic survey was emailed to practicing gastroenterology professionals and medical and surgical trainees. We assessed accuracy of responses compared to CRC screening and surveillance guidelines. We assessed factors associated with higher accuracy of knowledge, frequency of workplace smartphone use, and interest in a smartphone app to aid CRC screening and surveillance recommendations.Results: In total, 1432 responses were received. Hundred percent accuracy was noted in 22% of respondents for screening and 37% for surveillance. Factors associated with higher accuracy of screening guidelines included more recent training completion; academic practice; performing 21-100 colonoscopies per month (vs. < 21 or > 100). Higher accuracy of surveillance guidelines was associated with more recent training completion; academic practice; being a third-year fellow. In total, 53% use smartphones at least "often" in patient care. In total, 87% would use a CRC screening and surveillance smartphone app.Conclusions: Accuracy in applying CRC screening guidelines by gastroenterologists is poor. Smartphone use for patient care is prevalent. Our data show a high interest in a CRC screening/surveillance mobile app. Mobile tools appear an opportunity for rapid access and an increased adherence to CRC screening guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review has provided a summary of the biology of goblet cell metaplasia in CLE as it pertains to BE. Goblet cells are terminally differentiated nonproliferative cells that have many overlapping histochemical characteristics with mucinous columnar cells and pseudogoblet cells. There is an abundance of evidence that suggests that use of goblet cells as a biomarker of BE, and its progression to malignancy, is problematic. Some of these limitations include the fact that the background non-goblet epithelium in most patients with CLE is biologically intestinalized and contains molecular abnormalities similar to goblet cell CLE, goblet cells fluctuate with time and decrease in number with progression of neoplasia, and pathologists have problems with interpretation, and distinction, of goblet cells from other types of cells in the esophagus. Sampling error results in sensitivity and specificity issues that limit its positive predictive value. Goblet cells are fewest in number in the same population of patients with CLE that are hardest to detect endoscopically (i.e., those with short or ultrashort CLE). Nevertheless, the risk of cancer in patients with short-segment BE, a condition difficult to distinguish from the stomach, is very low regardless of the presence or absence of goblet cells so it is unclear what the role of goblet cells is in these patients as a biomarker. Nevertheless, if the answer to the following question, "Would you as a gastroenterologist recommend surveillance for a patient with clear endoscopic evidence of CLE, particularly if it is ≥ 3 cm in length, but in which goblet cells were not reported to be present by the pathologist," is yes, then the US requirement for goblet cells as part of the criteria for "BE" is superfluous. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]