Search

Background: Colorectal cancer is the third most diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Colonoscopy is an essential tool for screening, used as a primary approach and follow-up to an abnormal stool-based colorectal cancer screening result. Colonoscopy quality is often measured with 4 key indicators: bowel preparation, cecal intubation, mean withdrawal time, and adenoma detection. Colonoscopies are most often performed by gastroenterologists (GI), however, in rural and medically underserved areas, non-GI providers often perform colonoscopies. This study aims to evaluate the quality and safety of screening colonoscopies performed by non-GI practitioner, comparing their outcomes with those of GI providers., Methods: Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the study population. Results for quality indicators were stratified by provider type and compared. Statistical significance was determined using a P value of less than .05 as the threshold for all comparisons; all P values were 2-sided., Results: No statistical difference was found when comparing performance by provider type. Median performance for gastroenterologists, general surgeons, and family medicine providers ranged from 98% to 100% for cecal intubation; 97.4% to 100% for bowel preparation; 57.4% to 88.9% for male adenoma detection rate; 47.7% to 62.13% for female adenoma detection rate; and 0:12:10 to 0:20:16 for mean withdrawal time. All provider types met and exceeded the goal metric for each of the quality indicators (P < .001)., Conclusions: As a result of this analysis, we can expect non-GI practitioner to perform colonoscopies with similar quality to GI practitioner given the performance outcomes for the key quality metrics., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background and Aims: Management of inflammatory bowel disease is constantly evolving, increasing the importance for gastroenterologists to keep up to date with guidelines. Traditional implementation strategies have had only small positive impacts on clinical practice. eHealth strategies such as the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation e-guide may be beneficial for clinician decision making in keeping with guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the e-guide., Methods: A mixed methods approach was used to evaluate feasibility and acceptability. Cognitive (think-aloud) interviews were conducted with Australian gastroenterologists while using the e-guide. Two clinical scenarios were developed to allow evaluation of various aspects of the e-guide. Content analysis was applied to the qualitative interview data and descriptive analysis to the quantitative and observational data., Results: Seventeen participants completed the study. Data saturation were reached. The ECCO e-guide was largely feasible and acceptable, as demonstrated by most clinical questions answered correctly, 87% reaching the answer within 3 min, and most feeling it was useful, would be beneficial to their practice and would use it again. Issues raised included difficulties with website navigation, layout of the e-guide and difficulties with access (network firewalls, paid subscription required)., Conclusions: The ECCO e-guide is largely acceptable and feasible for gastroenterologists to use. Aspects of the e-guide could be modified to improve user experience. This study highlights the importance of engaging end-users in the development and evaluation of clinician educational tools., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Comprehensive and standardized colonoscopy reports are crucial in colorectal cancer prevention, monitoring, and research. This study investigates adherence to national and international guidelines by analyzing reporting practices among 21 endoscopists in 7 German centers, with a focus on polyp reporting., Methods: We identified and assessed German, European, American, and World Health Organization-provided statements to identify key elements in colonoscopy reporting. Board-certified gastroenterologists rated the relevance of each element and estimated their reporting frequency. Adherence to the identified report elements was evaluated for 874 polyps from 351 colonoscopy reports ranging from March 2021 to March 2022., Results: We identified numerous recommendations for colonoscopy reporting. We categorized the reasoning behind those recommendations into clinical relevance, justification, and quality control and research. Although all elements were considered relevant by the surveyed gastroenterologists, discrepancies were observed in the evaluated reports. Particularly diminutive polyps or attributes which are rarely abnormal (e.g., surface integrity) respectively rarely performed (e.g., injection) were sparsely documented. Furthermore, the white light morphology of polyps was inconsistently documented using either the Paris classification or free text. In summary, the analysis of 874 reported polyps revealed heterogeneous adherence to the recommendations, with reporting frequencies ranging from 3% to 89%., Conclusion: The inhomogeneous report practices may result from implicit reporting practices and recommendations with varying clinical relevance. Future recommendations should clearly differentiate between clinical relevance and research and quality control or explanatory purposes. Additionally, the role of computer-assisted documentation should be further evaluated to increase report frequencies of non-pathological findings and diminutive polyps., (© 2024 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background and Aims: Hepatologists often determine whether transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is preferred for patients with cirrhosis and severe aortic stenosis. The goal of this cohort study is to compare outcomes following TAVR and SAVR in patients with cirrhosis to inform the preferred intervention., Approach and Results: Prospectively collected data on 105 consecutive patients with cirrhosis and aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR (n = 55) or SAVR (n = 50) between 2008 and 2016 were reviewed retrospectively. Two control groups were included: 2,680 patients without cirrhosis undergoing TAVR and SAVR and 17 patients with cirrhosis who received medical therapy alone. Among the 105 patients with cirrhosis, the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 3.8% (1.5, 6.9), and the median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was 11.6 (9.4, 14.0). The TAVR group had similar in-hospital (1.8% vs. 2.0%) and 30-day mortality (3.6% vs. 4.2%) as the SAVR group. During the median follow-up of 3.8 years (95% confidence interval, 3.0-6.9), there were 63 (60%) deaths. MELD score (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.21; P = 0.002) was an independent predictor of long-term survival. In the subgroup of patients with MELD score <12, the TAVR group had reduced survival compared with the SAVR group (median survival of 2.8 vs. 4.4 years; P = 0.047). However, in those with MELD score ≥12, survival after TAVR, SAVR, and medical therapy was similar (1.3 vs. 2.1 vs. 1.6 years, respectively; P = 0.53)., Conclusion: In select patients with cirrhosis, both TAVR and SAVR have acceptable and comparable short-term outcomes. MELD score, but not Society of Thoracic Surgeons score, independently predicts long-term survival after TAVR and SAVR. For patients with MELD score <12, SAVR is a preferred procedure; however, neither procedure appears superior to medical therapy in patients with MELD score ≥12., (© 2020 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background: Functional gastrointestinal disorders are common and costly to the health-care system. Most specialist care is provided by a gastroenterologist, but only a minority of patients have improvement in symptoms. Although they have proven to be effective, psychological, behavioural, and dietary therapies are not provided routinely. We aimed to compare the outcome of gastroenterologist-only standard care with multidisciplinary care., Methods: In an open-label, single-centre, pragmatic trial, consecutive new referrals of eligible patients aged 18-80 years with Rome IV criteria-defined functional gastrointestinal disorders were randomly assigned (1:2) to receive gastroenterologist-only standard care or multidisciplinary clinic care. The multidisciplinary clinic included gastroenterologists, dietitians, gut-focused hypnotherapists, psychiatrists, and behavioural (biofeedback) physiotherapists. Randomisation was stratified by Rome IV disorder and whether referred from gastroenterology or colorectal clinic. Outcomes were assessed at clinic discharge or 9 months after the initial visit. The primary outcome was a score of 4 (slightly better) or 5 (much better) on a 5-point Likert scale assessing global symptom improvement. Modified intention-to-treat analysis included all patients who attended at least one clinic visit and who had answered the primary outcome question. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03078634., Findings: Between March 16, 2017, and May 10, 2018, 1632 patients referred to the hospital gastrointestinal clinics were screened, of whom 442 were eligible for a screening telephone call and 188 were randomly assigned to receive either standard care (n=65) or multidisciplinary care (n=123). 144 patients formed the modified intention-to-treat analysis (n=46 in the standard-care group and n=98 in the multidisciplinary-care group), 90 (63%) of whom were women. 61 (62%) of 98 patients in the multidisciplinary-care group patients saw allied clinicians. 26 (57%) patients in the standard-care group and 82 (84%) patients in the multidisciplinary-care group had global symptom improvement (risk ratio 1·50 [95% CI 1·13-1·93]; p=0·00045). 29 (63%) patients in the standard-care group and 81 (83%) patients in the multidisciplinary-care group had adequate relief of symptoms in the past 7 days (p=0·010). Patients in the multidisciplinary-care group were more likely to experience a 50% or higher reduction in all Gastrointestinal Symptom Severity Index symptom clusters than were patients in the standard-care group. Of the patients with irritable bowel syndrome, a 50-point or higher reduction in IBS-SSS occurred in 10 (38%) of 26 patients in the standard care group compared with 39 (66%) of 59 patients in the multidisciplinary-care group (p=0·017). Of the patients with functional dyspepsia, a 50% reduction in the Nepean Dyspepsia Index was noted in three (11%) of 11 patients in the standard-care group and in 13 (46%) of 28 in the multidisciplinary-care group (p=0·47). After treatment, the median HADS scores were higher in the standard-care group than in the multidisciplinary-care group (13 [8-20] vs 10 [6-16]; p=0·096) and the median EQ-5D-5L quality of life visual analogue scale was lower in the standard-care group compared with the multidisciplinary-care group (70 [IQR 50-80] vs 75 [65-85]; p=0·0087). The eight SF-36 scales did not differ between the groups at discharge. After treatment, median Somatic Symptom Scale-8 score was higher in the standard-care group than in the multidisciplinary-care group (10 [IQR 7-7] vs 9 [5-13]; p=0·082). Cost per successful outcome was higher in the standard-care group than the multidisciplinary-care group., Interpretation: Integrated multidisciplinary clinical care appears to be superior to gastroenterologist-only care in relation to symptoms, specific functional disorders, psychological state, quality of life, and cost of care for the treatment of functional gastrointestinal disorders. Consideration should be given to providing multidisciplinary care for patients with a functional gastrointestinal disorder., Funding: None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the major complications of chronic liver disease, mostly of liver cirrhosis. Liver diseases from different causes differ in the risks of HCC development. Different mechanisms of carcinogenesis are involved in HCC development in different liver diseases as well. Generally, two main pathways are distinguished: the cause of liver disease itself (e.g. viral infections, accumulation of heavy metals etc.) and chronic liver inflammation and fibrogenesis, including mechanisms of oxidative stress. Rare cases of HCC in liver without underlying cirrhosis are likely the consequences of the mechanisms directly linked with particular etiological factor (e.g. protein X in chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection). The key approach which can lead to significantly better results of any treatment used in HCC cases is HCC screening and surveillance. The appropriate method of HCC surveillance is abdominal ultrasonography in 6-month intervals. There is still one question to be solved: the correct definition of target population which should undergo this method of surveillance. Currently, the target population in the developed world is defined as all patients with liver cirrhosis. Unfortunately, the only method of primary prevention of HCC is available: universal HBV vaccination. Antiviral treatment of hepatitis B or C is considered as a method of secondary prevention. Adjuvant therapy of HCC after its primary therapy (antiviral therapy after HCC resection etc.) and other measures able to reduce HCC recurrence risk are usually mentioned as tertiary prevention approach. The BCLC staging system is the most common system used in Europe for the classification of HCC at the dia-gnosis. This classification combines the stage of HCC itself with other parameters, such as liver disease severity (Child - Pugh classification), portal hypertension etc. BCLC is a system which guides the physicians to optimal treatment options in every HCC stage. The only potentially curable approaches are surgical resection or liver transplantation. These options may be used in 1/3 of all HCC patients. Unfortunately, the vast majority of HCC patients can be treated only by palliative treatment options with transarterial chemoembolisation being the most common one.

In this paper, we aimed to provide professional guidance to practising gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopists for the safe conduct of GI endoscopy procedures during the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and future outbreaks of similar severe respiratory tract infections in Singapore. It draws on the lessons learnt during the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic and available published data concerning the COVID-19 pandemic. It addresses measures before, during and after endoscopy that must be considered for both non-infected and infected patients, and provides recommendations for practical implementation., (Copyright: © Singapore Medical Association.)

Medical errors are a troubling issue and physicians should be careful to scrutinize their own decisions, remaining open to the possibility that they may be wrong. Even so, doctors may still be overconfident. A survey was here conducted to test how medical experience and self-confidence can affect physicians working in the specific clinical area. Potential participants were contacted through personalized emails and invited to contribute to the survey. The "risk-intelligence" test consists of 50 statements about general knowledge in which participants were asked to indicate how likely they thought that each statement was true or false. The risk-intelligence quotient (RQ), a measure of self-confidence, varies between 0 and 100. The higher the RQ score, the better the confidence in personal knowledge. To allow for a representation of 1000 physicians, the sample size was calculated as 278 respondents. A total of 1334 individual emails were sent to reach 278 respondents. A control group of 198 medical students were also invited, of them, 54 responded to the survey. The mean RQ (SD)of physicians was 61.1 (11.4) and that of students was 52.6 (9.9). Assuming age as indicator of knowledge, it was observed that physicians ≤34 years had a mean RQ of 59.1 (10.1); those of 35-42 years had 61.0 (11.0); in those of 43-51 years increased to 62.9 (12.2); reached a plateau of 63.0 (11.5) between 52-59 years and decreased to 59.6 (12.1) in respondents ≥60 years (r 2 :0.992). Doctors overestimate smaller probabilities and under-estimate higher probabilities. Specialists in gastroenterology and hepato-biliary diseases suffer from some degree of self-confidence bias, potentially leading to medical errors. Approaches aimed at ameliorating the self-judgment should be promoted more widely in medical education.

We conducted a survey of primary care clinicians and gastroenterologists (n = 938) between 11/06/19-12/06/19 to assess knowledge and attitudes regarding colorectal cancer screening. We assessed clinicians' attitudes toward lowering the colorectal cancer screening initiation age to 45 years, a topic of current debate. We also evaluated provider and practice characteristics associated with agreement. Only 38.1% of primary care clinicians endorsed colorectal cancer screening initiation at age 45 years, compared to 75.5% of gastroenterologists (p < .0001). Gastroenterologists were over 5 times more likely than primary care clinicians to endorse lowering the screening initiation age (OR = 5.30, 3.54-7.93). Other factors found to be independently associated with agreement with colorectal cancer screening initiation at age 45 years included seeing more than 25 patients per day (vs. fewer) and suburban (vs. urban) location. Results emphasize the need for collaboration between primary care clinicians and gastroenterologists to ensure that patients receive consistent messaging and evidence-based care.

Endoscopic-retrograde-cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is now a vital modality with primarily therapeutic and occasionally solely diagnostic utility for numerous biliary/pancreatic disorders. It has a significantly steeper learning curve than that for other standard gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopies, such as esophagogastroduodenoscopy or colonoscopy, due to greater technical difficulty and higher risk of complications. Yet, GI fellows have limited exposure to ERCP during standard-three-year-GI-fellowships because ERCP is much less frequently performed than esophagogastroduodenoscopy/colonoscopy. This led to adding an optional year of training in therapeutic endoscopy. Yet many graduates from standard three-year-fellowships without advanced training intensely pursue independent/unsupervised ERCP privileges despite inadequate numbers of performed ERCPs and unacceptably low rates of successful selective cannulation of desired (biliary or pancreatic) duct. Hospital credentialing committees have traditionally performed ERCP credentialing, but this practice has led to widespread flouting of recommended guidelines ( e.g ., planned privileging of applicant with 20% successful cannulation rate, or after performing only 7 ERCPs); and intense politicking of committee members by applicants, their practice groups, and potential competitors. Consequently, some gastroenterologists upon completing standard fellowships train and learn ERCP "on the job" during independent/unsupervised practice, which can result in bad outcomes: high rates of failed bile duct cannulation. This severe clinical problem is indicated by publication of ≥ 12 ERCP competency studies/guidelines during last 5 years. However, lack of mandatory, quantitative, ERCP credentialing criteria has permitted neglect of recommended guidelines. This work comprehensively reviews literature on ERCP credentialing; reviews rationales for proposed guidelines; reports problems with current system; and proposes novel criteria for competency. This work advocates for mandatory, national, written, minimum, quantitative, standards, including cognitive skills (possibly assessed by a nationwide examination), and technical skills, assessed by number performed (≥ 200-250 ERCPs), types of ERCPs, success rate (approximately ≥ 90% cannulation of desired duct), and letters of recommendation by program director/ERCP mentor. Mandatory criteria should ideally not be monitored by a hospital committee subjected to intense politicking by applicants, their employers, and sometimes even competitors, but an independent national entity, like the National Board of Medical Examiners/American Board of Internal Medicine., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: None for either Dr. Cappell or Dr. Friedel. In particular, Dr. Cappell, as a consultant for the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Advisory Committee for Gastroenterology Drugs, affirms that this paper does not discuss any proprietary confidential pharmaceutical data submitted to the FDA and reviewed by Dr. Cappell. Dr. Cappell was until 1 year ago a member of the speaker’s bureau for AstraZeneca and Daiichi Sankyo, co-marketers of Movantik. Dr. Cappell has had one-time consultancies for Mallinckrodt and Shire. This work does not discuss any drug manufactured or marketed by AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Shire, or Mallinckrodt.

Importance: Research demonstrates adenoma detection rate (ADR) and proximal sessile serrated polyp detection rate (pSSPDR) are associated with endoscopist characteristics including sex, specialty, and years in practice. However, many studies have not adjusted for other risk factors associated with colonic neoplasia., Objective: To assess the association between endoscopist characteristics and polyp detection after adjusting the factors included in previous studies as well as other factors., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted in the Cleveland Clinic health system with data from individuals undergoing screening colonoscopies between January 2015 and June 2017. The study analyzed data using methods from previous studies that have demonstrated significant associations between endoscopist characteristics and ADR or pSSPDR. Multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression was performed to examine 7 endoscopist characteristics associated with ADRs and pSSPDRs after controlling for patient demographic, clinical, and colonoscopy-associated factors., Exposures: Seven characteristics of endoscopists performing colonoscopy., Main Outcomes and Measures: The ADR and pSSPDR, with a hypothesis created after data collection began., Results: A total of 16 089 colonoscopies were performed in 16 089 patients by 56 clinicians. Of these, 8339 patients were male (51.8%), and the median (range) age of the cohort was 59 (52-66) years. Analyzing the data by the methods used in 4 previous studies yielded an association between endoscopist and polyp detection; surgeons (OR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28-0.83]) and nongastroenterologists (OR, 0.50 [95% CI 0.29-0.85]) had reduced odds of pSSPDR, which was similar to results in previous studies. In a multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression analysis, ADR was not significantly associated with any endoscopist characteristic, and pSSPDR was only associated with years in practice (odds ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.83-0.89] per increment of 10 years; P < .001) and number of annual colonoscopies performed (odds ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.01-1.09] per 50 colonoscopies/year; P = .02)., Conclusions and Relevance: The differences in ADRs that were associated with 7 of 7 endoscopist characteristics and differences in pSSPDRs that were associated with 5 of 7 endoscopist characteristics in previous studies may have been associated with residual confounding, because they were not replicated in this analysis. Therefore, these characteristics should not influence the choice of endoscopist for colorectal cancer screening. However, clinicians further from their training and those with lower colonoscopy volumes have lower adjusted pSSPDRs and may need additional training to help increase pSSPDRs.

Background: With the emergence of alternative payment systems replacing the traditional funding models, the value of physician activity is scrutinized more closely. Attempts have been made to quantify the value of endoscopists' activity; there is little in the medical literature describing gastroenterologists' value in the outpatient setting., Aims: To characterize the value of clinical activity of gastroenterologists in the outpatient setting., Methods: The value of clinical activity of ten gastroenterologists in an academic medical center was estimated. Value was defined as Q (quality of clinical care) divided by T A (duration of outpatient visit adjusted for complexity level); T A served as a surrogate measure of the cost of the clinician's services. Medical records of each patient's clinical visit were reviewed and graded independently by three staff gastroenterologists; each reviewer was blinded to the identity of the physician and to other reviewers' scores., Results: Over consecutive weeks, the clinical records of 307 patients who were seen by ten gastroenterologists were reviewed and graded for quality (Q) and complexity (C); the duration of each visit (T) was recorded. Each physician saw a mean of 31 patients; mean physician value varied from 0.28 to 0.87. More senior physicians demonstrated higher levels of value., Conclusion: Measurement of the value of clinical activity represents an important component of gastroenterologists' performance. There was a threefold variation among physician levels of value with more experienced clinicians demonstrating higher value levels. Further studies will be required to more clearly define valid metrics for physician value.

Modern medicine provides almost infinite diagnostic and therapeutic possibilities if compared to the past. As a result, patients undergo a multiplication of tests and therapies, which in turn may trigger further tests, often based on physicians' attitudes or beliefs, which are not always evidence-based. The Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists and Endoscopists (AIGO) adhered to the Choosing Wisely Campaign to promote an informed, evidence-based approach to gastroenterological problems. The aim of this article is to report the five recommendations of the AIGO Choosing Wisely Campaign, and the process used to develop them. The AIGO members' suggestions regarding inappropriate practices/interventions were collected. One hundred and twenty-one items were identified. Among these, five items were selected and five recommendations were developed. The five recommendations developed were: (1) Do not request a fecal occult blood test outside the colorectal cancer screening programme; (2) Do not repeat surveillance colonoscopy for polyps, after a quality colonoscopy, before the interval suggested by the gastroenterologist on the colonoscopy report, or based on the polyp histology report; (3) Do not repeat esophagogastroduodenoscopy in patients with reflux symptoms, with or without hiatal hernia, in the absence of different symptoms or alarm symptoms; (4) Do not repeat abdominal ultrasound in asymptomatic patients with small hepatic haemangiomas (diameter < 3 cm) once the diagnosis has been established conclusively; (5) Do not routinely prescribe proton pump inhibitors within the context of steroid use or long-term in patients with functional dyspepsia. AIGO adhered to the Choosing Wisely Campaign and developed five recommendations. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of these recommendations in clinical practice with regards to clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness.

Background and Aims: Various gastrointestinal societies have released guidelines on the evaluation of asymptomatic pancreatic cysts (PCs). These guidelines differ on several aspects, which create a conundrum for clinicians. The aim of this study was to evaluate preferences and practice patterns in the management of incidental PCs in light of these societal recommendations., Methods: An electronic survey distributed to members of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE). Main outcomes included practice setting (academic vs. community), preferences for evaluation, management, and surveillance strategies for PCs., Results: A total of 172 subjects completed the study (52% academic-based endoscopists). Eighty-six (50%) and 138 (80%) of the participants responded that they would recommend EUS surveillance of incidental PCs measuring less than 2 cm and 3 cm, respectively. Nearly half of the endosonographers (42.5% community and 44% academic; p = 1.0) would routinely perform FNA on PCs without any high-risk features. More academic-based endoscopists (57% academic vs. 32% community; p = 0.001) would continue incidental PC surveillance indefinitely., Conclusions: There is significant variability in the approach of incidental PCs among clinicians, with practice patterns often diverging from the various GI societal guideline recommendations. Most survey respondents would routinely recommend EUS-FNA and indefinite surveillance for incidental PCs without high-risk features. The indiscriminate use of EUS-FNA and indefinite surveillance of all incidental PCs is not cost-effective, exposes the patient to unnecessary testing, and can further perpetuate diagnostic uncertainty. Well-designed studies are needed to improve our diagnostic and risk stratification accuracy in order to formulate a consensus on the management of these incidental PCs.

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.

Objectives: Although the 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines recommend against routine colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for adults aged 76-85, it is unclear what endoscopists recommend in practice. Our goal was to examine current practice around cessation of CRC screening in older adults., Methods: We included normal screening colonoscopy exams in adults ≥ 50 years old within the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry between 2009 and 2014. The primary outcome was endoscopists' recommendation against further screening. The main exposure variables included patient age, family history of CRC, and endoscopist characteristics. Descriptive statistics and univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used., Results: Of 13,364 normal screening colonoscopy exams, 2914 (21.8%) were in adults aged ≥ 65 and were performed by 74 endoscopists. Nearly 100% of adults aged 65-69 undergoing screening colonoscopy were given the recommendation to return for screening colonoscopy in the future. Only 15% of average-risk patients aged 70-74 were told to stop receiving screening, while 85% were told to return at a future interval, most frequently in 10 years when they would be 80-84. In the multivariable model, advancing patient age and the absence of family history of CRC were significantly associated with a recommendation to stop colonoscopy. Gastroenterologists were more likely to recommend stopping colonoscopy in accordance with guidelines than other non-gastroenterology endoscopists (adjusted OR (95% CI) 2.3 (1.6-3.4))., Conclusions: In a large statewide colonoscopy registry, the majority of older adults are told to return for future screening colonoscopy. Having a family history of CRC or a non-gastroenterology endoscopist increases the likelihood of being told to return for screening at advanced ages.

Malnutrition is a common cause of impeding recovery in patients with acute alcoholic hepatitis (AAH). Previous reports have shown that appropriate nutritional supplementation reduce short and long-term mortality in patients with AAH. Despite these clear recommendations, the element of nutrition in AAH is often neglected. We designed a quality improvement project to evaluate and improve compliance with appropriate nutrition in patients presenting with AAH at our institution. Patients admitted with AAH between December 2015 to December 2016 were included. Our primary outcome was compliance with appropriate nutrition. Secondary outcomes included nutrition consultation and hepatology consultation. A total of fifty-four patients were included. Nine of the 53 patients (17%) received high calorie and high protein diets. Hepatology was consulted in 72% (38/53) of the patients, and 21% (8/38) of these patients received appropriate nutrition as compared to only 8.3% (1/12) in whom hepatology was not consulted. Nutrition was consulted in 55% (29/53) of these patients and 67% (19/28) of those patients received appropriate nutrition. In conclusion, our compliance of appropriate nutrition in AAH is low. Our initial investigation suggests that hepatology and nutrition consultation improved compliance with appropriate nutrition. The next step will be to implement protocolized care for appropriate nutrition in AAH by incorporating consultation of hepatology and nutrition services, assess the effect on adherence to appropriate nutrition, and determine the impact on patient outcomes.

Introduction: Despite consensus eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) statement published in 2011 calling for a 2-month trial of protons pump inhibitor (PPI), the guidelines are not followed by many. We studied the practice patterns in our community and response to a PPI retrial in patients previously diagnosed with "idiopathic EoE.", Methods: All patients presenting to the senior author's practice with suspected EoE from 2011 to 2015. Two cohorts were studied: (1) patients diagnosed in the community as "idiopathic EoE"; (2) treatment naïve patients given a PPI trial at University of South Florida. PPI responsive eosinophilia was defined after 2 months of high dose PPIs after initial diagnosis of mucosal eosinophilia and histologic response of <15 eosinophils per HPF. SPSS v19.0 was used to calculate mean difference and odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals., Results: In total, 78 patients met inclusion criteria, 46 patients had outside diagnosis of "idiopathic EoE," and 41 patients received a PPI trial at University of South Florida. In total, 34/46 (73.9%) community patients were placed on a PPI, 3/46 (6.5%) were placed on elimination diets, 31/46 (67.4%) steroids, and 21/46 (45.7%) were treated with both steroids/PPIs. Fewer patients received PPI trials in the community 3/46 (6.5%) versus 26/34 (76.5%) at our center [OR, 46.6 (95% CI, 11.3-191.5); P<0.0001]. In total, 12/26 (46.2%) were PPI responders on our retrial despite previously being diagnosed with idiopathic EoE. The group initially diagnosed at our center had a higher PPI response rate 12/15 (80%) versus 12/26 (46.2%) in the community group [OR, 7.58 (1.42, 40.55; P=0.018)]., Conclusions: The importance of a PPI trial is misunderstood and may be confused with the more traditional PPI trial for gastroesophageal reflux disease. This algorithm is critical and should be done before empiric steroids/diet therapies.

Background and Aims: . The video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is an accurate and validated tool to investigate the entire small bowel mucosa, but VCE recordings interpretation by the gastroenterologist is time-consuming. A pre-reading of VCE recordings by an expert nurse could be accurate and cost saving. We assessed the concordance between nurses and gastroenterologists in detecting lesions on VCE examinations., Methods: This was a prospective study enrolling consecutive patients who had undergone VCE in clinical practice. Two trained nurses and two expert gastroenterologists participated in the study. At VCE pre-reading the nurses selected any abnormalities, saved them as "thumbnails" and classified the detected lesions as a vascular abnormality, ulcerative lesion, polyp, tumor mass, and unclassified lesion. Then, the gastroenterologist evaluated and interpreted the selected lesions and, successively, reviewed the entire video for potential missed lesions. The time for VCE evaluation was recorded., Results: A total of 95 VCE procedures performed on consecutive patients (M/F: 47/48; mean age: 63 +/- 12 years, range: 27-86 years) were evaluated. Overall, the nurses detected at least one lesion in 54 (56.8%) patients. There was total agreement between nurses and gastroenterologists, no missing lesions being discovered at a second look of the entire VCE recording by the physician. The pre-reading procedure by nurse allowed a time reduction of medical evaluation from 49 (33-69) to 10 (8-16) minutes (difference: -79.6%)., Conclusions: Our data suggest that trained nurses can accurately identify and select relevant lesions in thumbnails that subsequently were faster reviewed by the gastroenterologist for a final diagnosis. This could significantly reduce the cost of VCE procedure.

The management of the post-liver transplant patient is complex and involves a large interdisciplinary team. After referral to a transplant center, evaluation and listing, and eventual transplantation, the patient is cared for closely by the transplant center. Once deemed ready for discharge, the patient returns to the primary care provider for ongoing management of the various issues that increase in incidence post transplant such as osteoporosis, cardiovascular, and renal diseases, as well as metabolic syndrome. The role of the gastroenterologist is not well defined, but certainly, he or she may be called upon for the initial evaluation and ongoing management of gastrointestinal as well as hepatobiliary issues. This includes but is not limited to the investigation of abnormal liver tests, non-specific gastrointestinal complaints such as nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea, biliary complications, and even recurrent hepatic disease. Having familiarity with post-transplant immunosuppressive agents, drug interactions, and potential infectious and malignancy-related complications of transplant is essential, as the primary gastroenterologist may be expected in some situations to field the initial work-up, if patient access to the transplant center is limited. The aim of this review is to summarize the gastroenterologist's role in the management of the post-liver transplant patient.

Background and Aims: Esophageal food impaction (EFI) is a gastrointestinal emergency requiring immediate evaluation in the emergency room (ER) and an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for disimpaction. EFI is also a distinct presenting feature of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). This study aimed at understanding the management of EFI among gastroenterologists (GIs) and estimated its impact on identification of EoE in USA., Methods: GIs associated with three major gastroenterology societies based in USA were invited to participate in a web-based survey. Information on the resources available and utilized, and the clinical decision-making process related to management of EFI cases was collected and analyzed., Results: Of 428 responses, 49% were from pediatric GIs, 86% practiced in the USA, and 78% practiced in an academic setting. Compared to the pediatric GIs, adult GIs were more likely to perform EGD in the emergency room [OR 87.96 (25.43-304.16)] and advance the food bolus into stomach [5.58 (3.08-10.12)]. Only 34% of respondents obtained esophageal biopsies during EGD, and pediatric GIs were more likely to obtain esophageal biopsies [3.49 (1.12-10.84)] compared to adult GIs. In USA, by our conservative estimates, 10,494 patients presenting to ER with EFI and at risk of EoE are likely being missed each year., Conclusions: EFI management varies substantially among GIs associated with three major gastroenterology societies in USA. Based on their practice patterns, the GIs in USA are likely to miss numerous EoE patients presenting to ER with EFI. Our findings highlight the need for developing and disseminating evidence-based EFI management practice guidelines.

Background: The administration of human albumin (HA) in patients with decompensated cirrhosis is still debated. The European Foundation for the Study of Chronic Liver Failure (EF-CLIF) promoted an online survey to assess its use across Europe., Methods: Hepatologists were invited to participate to an electronic questionnaire based on multiple-choice questions divided in 6 different areas. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed to analyze the responses., Results: One hundred-one hepatologists (36% non-EF-CLIF member), belonging to 86 centers (25% non-academic hospitals) completed the survey. The vast majority of participants prescribe HA for the evidence-based indications supported by international guidelines, while a proportion of them consider HA administration useful for other complications currently not supported by solid scientific evidence. Participants show a good level of knowledge about the non-oncotic properties of the molecule, while HA prescription does not appear to be restricted by health authorities in most centers, at least for the evidence-based indications., Conclusions: The present survey indicates that hepatologists across Europe present adherence to international guidelines and highlights the areas where solid scientific data are awaited to achieve a more appropriate HA prescription in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

Chronic digestive diseases, including irritable bowel syndrome, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and inflammatory bowel diseases, cannot be disentangled from their psychological context-the substantial burden of these diseases is co-determined by symptom and disease severity and the ability of patients to cope with their symptoms without significant interruption to daily life. The growing field of psychogastroenterology focuses on the application of scientifically based psychological principles and techniques to the alleviation of digestive symptoms. In this Clinical Practice Update, we describe the structure and efficacy of 2 major classes of psychotherapy-cognitive behavior therapy and gut-directed hypnotherapy. We focus on the impact of these brain-gut psychotherapies on gastrointestinal symptoms, as well as their ability to facilitate improved coping, resilience, and self-regulation. The importance of the gastroenterologist in the promotion of integrated psychological care cannot be overstated, and recommendations are provided on how to address psychological issues and make an effective referral for brain-gut psychotherapy in routine practice., (Copyright © 2018 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Inadequate polypectomy leads to incomplete resection, interval colorectal cancer, and adverse events. However, polypectomy competency is rarely reported, and quality metrics are lacking. The primary aims of this study were to assess polypectomy competency among a cohort of gastroenterologists and to measure the correlation between polypectomy competency and established colonoscopy quality metrics (adenoma detection rate and withdrawal time)., Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study to assess polypectomy competency among 13 high-volume screening colonoscopists at an academic medical center. Over 6 weeks, we made video recordings of ≥28 colonoscopies per colonoscopist and randomly selected 10 polypectomies per colonoscopist for evaluation. Two raters graded the polypectomies by using the Direct Observation of Polypectomy Skills, a polypectomy competency assessment tool, which assesses individual polypectomy skills and overall competency., Results: We evaluated 130 polypectomies. A total of 83 polypectomies (64%) were rated as competent, which was more likely for diminutive (70%) than small and/or large polyps (50%, P = .03). Overall Direct Observation of Polypectomy Skills competency scores varied significantly among colonoscopists (P = .001), with overall polypectomy competency rates ranging between 30% and 90%. Individual skills scores, such as accurately directing the snare over the lesion (P = .02) and trapping an appropriate amount of tissue within the snare (P = .001) varied significantly between colonoscopists. Polypectomy competency rates did not significantly correlate with the adenoma detection rate (r = 0.4; P = .2) or withdrawal time (r = 0.2; P = .5)., Conclusions: Polypectomy competency varies significantly among colonoscopists and does not sufficiently correlate with established quality metrics. Given the clinical implications of suboptimal polypectomy, efforts to educate colonoscopists in polypectomy techniques and develop a metric of polypectomy quality are needed., (Copyright © 2018 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Postoperative recurrence (POR) of Crohn's disease (CD) is common. Guidelines on POR management have recently been issued, but clinical practice may vary., Aims: To examine the current clinical practice of POR management in the USA METHODS: A web-based survey was sent to all members of the American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology. The survey consisted of multiple-choice questions with clinical scenarios to assess how participants manage POR., Results: A total of 189 responses were received from practices in 34 states. 44% of participants were from academic settings. The median number of CD patients seen each month was 20-30 patients per participant. The majority of participants considered smoking, prior intestinal surgery, penetrating disease, perianal fistula, early disease onset, and long extent of disease as high-risk factors for POR. To diagnose and grade endoscopic recurrence, 57% of participants used an endoscopic scoring system; 86% defined clinical recurrence using a combination of symptoms and endoscopic findings; and 79% of participants routinely performed colonoscopy after surgery. In high-risk patients, 65% offered medical prophylaxis-most often biologics and/or immunomodulators-immediately after surgery, while 34% offered medical prophylaxis regardless of the patient's risk of POR. 64% of participants never stopped medical prophylaxis once initiated., Conclusions: Most gastroenterologists routinely perform colonoscopy to guide POR management. The majority of these providers continue medical prophylaxis indefinitely regardless of subsequent endoscopic findings. Further research is needed to determine the risks and benefits of continuing versus deescalating therapy in patients with potentially surgically induced remission.

Background: One of the numerous sub-areas of interventional radiology is the use of X-rays in gastroenterology. X-ray fluoroscopy is applied in therapeutic procedures, including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) that is frequently performed. The ERCP procedure is aimed at imaging the pancreatic duct and biliary tracts., Material and Methods: In this paper radiation risk to the gastrenterologist performing ERCP procedures was investigated. The procedures were performed by a single gastroenterologist in the ERCP Laboratory, University Clinical Hospital Military Memorial Medical Academy - Central Veterans' Hospital in Łódź, Poland. The study comprised 2 series of measurements, one taken during the procedures with continuous fluoroscopy mode, the other during procedures with fluoroscopy in pulsed mode at a frequency of 3 pulses/s. Exposure parameters, anatomical data of patient and dose equivalents for the eyes, skin of the hand and the effective dose for whole body of the gastroenterologist were recorded during each procedure., Results: The collected data cover 70 ERCP procedures - 40 procedures were controlled by continuous fluoroscopy and 30 by pulsed fluoroscopy. The results reveal that pulsed fluoroscopy makes it possible to reduce doses received by the gastroeneterologist from 45% to 60% compared to continuous fluoroscopy., Conclusions: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures can cause radiation risk to the gastroenterologist performing them. The use of continuous fluoroscopy can result in achieving an equivalent dose to eye lens nearly 20 mSv per year, i.e., the decreased annual limit recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). Med Pr 2017;68(6):735-741., (This work is available in Open Access model and licensed under a CC BY-NC 3.0 PL license.)

Introduction: The use of human albumin for the management of cirrhosis has increased. Recommendations have been published for therapeutic paracentesis (TP), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), and type 1 hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). The goal of this survey was to assess the prescription practices of French hepatogastroenterologists., Methods: All hepatogastroenterologists were contacted. The questionnaire evaluated (1) the use of albumin in validated indications and (2) the prescription of albumin for nonvalidated clinical situations., Results: Responses were analyzed from 451 (50.1%) practitioners. The mean age was 40 years (range, 24 to 67 y). Physicians practiced in a university hospital (47.7%) or a general hospital (45.8%). There were 56.7% senior practitioners. Overall 99.6% of the practitioners compensated for TP. Albumin was used by 87.8% of the physicians, with a fixed dose being used by 84.6%. For SBP, 94% of the physicians used albumin concomitantly with antibiotics. The recommended protocol was followed by 56.2% of the practitioners: more often by senior university hospital practitioners than by senior general hospital practitioners (P=0.015). About 66.5% used albumin infusion for the diagnosis of HRS: used more often by senior university hospital practitioners (P=0.0006). Albumin was used concomitantly with vasopressor treatment by 84%; the dose and the duration varied considerably. About 23.5% used albumin for severe bacterial infection, 47.9% for severe hyponatremia, 43.9% for severe hypoalbuminemia, and 65.9% for hydrothorax., Conclusions: In this large French survey, albumin is only prescribed in accordance with recommendations for TP. The schedule for SBP is followed by only 56% of the practitioners. The use of albumin for HRS is not adapted to recommendations, which are not well known, suggesting that they should be more diffused.

Background: Studies have indicated that anxiety and depression are significant contributors to reporting of increased disease activity in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Thus, for the appropriate clinical management of these patients, it is important that gastroenterologists are able to recognize these conditions. This study aimed to examine the level of agreement between gastroenterologists and patients with IBD for the presence of clinically significant anxiety and depression., Methods: Before consultation, patients completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Survey. After the consultation, the gastroenterologist recorded whether they believed the patient was anxious and depressed and if so, whether any further action had been taken., Results: Seventy-five patients participated in this study, with a response rate of 88%. Self-reported questionnaires indicated that 31% and 11% of patients were identified as probable for having anxiety and depression, respectively. The level of agreement between the patient and gastroenterologist as to the presence of anxiety or depression was fair to moderate (kappa statistic 0.32 and 0.41, respectively). In only 50% of cases was further action taken by gastroenterologists during consultation for distressed patients, mostly in the form of a patient discussion., Conclusions: Agreement between gastroenterologists and IBD patients regarding the presence of clinically significant anxiety or depression was low, with no further action taken after consultation for 50% of patients who were identified by gastroenterologists as being anxious or depressed. This study highlights the need for educating gastroenterologists to improve their ability to identify IBD patient distress.

Background & Aims: Endoscopists do not routinely follow guidelines to survey individuals with low-risk adenomas (LRAs; 1-2 small tubular adenomas, < 1 cm) every 5-10 years for colorectal cancer; many recommend shorter surveillance intervals for these individuals. We aimed to identify the reasons that endoscopists recommend shorter surveillance intervals for some individuals with LRAs and determine whether timing affects outcomes at follow-up examinations., Methods: We collected data from 1560 individuals (45-75 years old) who participated in a prospective chemoprevention trial (of vitamin D and calcium) from 2004 through 2008. Participants in the trial had at least 1 adenoma, detected at their index colonoscopy, and were recommended to receive follow-up colonoscopy examinations at 3 or 5 years after adenoma identification, as recommended by the endoscopist. For this analysis we collected data from only participants with LRAs. These data included characteristics of participants and endoscopists and findings from index and follow-up colonoscopies. Primary endpoints were frequency of recommending shorter (3-year) vs longer (5-year) surveillance intervals, factors associated with these recommendations, and effect on outcome, determined at the follow-up colonoscopy., Results: A 3-year surveillance interval was recommended for 594 of the subjects (38.1%). Factors most significantly associated with recommendation of 3-year vs a 5-year surveillance interval included African American race (relative risk [RR] to white, 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-1.75), Asian/Pacific Islander ethnicity (RR to white, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.22-2.43), detection of 2 adenomas at the index examination (RR vs 1 adenoma, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.27-1.71), more than 3 serrated polyps at the index examination (RR=2.16, 95% CI, 1.59-2.93), or index examination with fair or poor quality bowel preparation (RR vs excellent quality, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.66-2.83). Other factors that had a significant association with recommendation for a 3-year surveillance interval included family history of colorectal cancer and detection of 1-2 serrated polyps at the index examination. In comparisons of outcomes, we found no significant differences between the 3-year vs 5-year recommendation groups in proportions of subjects found to have 1 or more adenomas (38.8% vs 41.7% respectively; P = .27), advanced adenomas (7.7% vs 8.2%; P = .73) or clinically significant serrated polyps (10.0% vs 10.3%; P = .82) at the follow-up colonoscopy., Conclusions: Possibly influenced by patients' family history, race, quality of bowel preparation, or number or size of polyps, endoscopists frequently recommend 3-year surveillance intervals instead of guideline-recommended intervals of 5 years or longer for individuals with LRAs. However, at the follow-up colonoscopy, similar proportions of participants have 1 or more adenomas, advanced adenomas, or serrated polyps. These findings support the current guideline recommendations of performing follow-up examinations of individuals with LRAs at least 5 years after the index colonoscopy., (Copyright © 2017 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Quality performance measures for screening colonoscopy vary among endoscopists. The impact of practice setting is unknown., Aims: We aimed to (1) compare screening colonoscopy performance measures among three different US practice settings; (2) evaluate factors associated with adenoma detection; and (3) assess a scorecard intervention on performance metrics., Methods: This multi-center prospective study compared patient, endoscopist, and colonoscopy characteristics performed at a tertiary care hospital (TCH), community-based hospital (CBH), and private practice group (PPG). Withdrawal times (WT), cecal intubation, and adenoma detection rates (ADR) were compared by site at baseline and 12 weeks following scorecard distribution. Generalized linear mixed models identified factors associated with adenoma detection., Results: Twenty-eight endoscopists performed colonoscopies on 1987 asymptomatic, average-risk individuals ≥50 years. Endoscopist and patient characteristics were similar across sites. The PPG screened more men (TCH: 42.8%, CBH: 45.0%, PPG: 54.2%; p < 0.0001). Preparation quality varied with good/excellent results in 70.6, 88.3, and 92% of TCH, CBH, and PPG cases, respectively (p < 0.0001). Male ADRs, cecal intubation, and WT exceeded recommended benchmarks despite variable results at each site; female ADRs were <15% at the PPG which screened the fewest females. Performance remained unchanged following scorecard distribution. Adenoma detection was associated with increasing patient age, male gender, WT, adequate preparation, but not practice setting., Conclusions: Each practice performed high-quality screening colonoscopy. Scorecards did not improve performance metrics. Preparation quality varies among practice settings and can be modified to improve adenoma detection.

Objectives: Before an endoscopic procedure, an evaluation to assess the risk of sedation is performed by the gastroenterologist. To risk stratify based on medical problems, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification scores are used routinely in the preprocedure evaluation. The objective of our study was to evaluate among physicians the ASA score accuracy pre-endoscopic procedures., Methods: At a single tertiary-care center an institutional review board-approved retrospective study was performed. Upper endoscopies performed from May 2012 through August 2013 were reviewed; data were collected and recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistics and linear weighted kappa analysis for agreement (≤0.20 is poor agreement, 0.21-0.40 is fair, 0.41-0.60 is moderate, 0.61-0.80 is good, and 0.81-1.00 is very good)., Results: The mean ASA scores by the gastroenterologist compared with the anesthesiologist were 2.28 ± 0.56 and 2.78 ± 0.60, respectively, with only fair agreement (weighted kappa index 0.223, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.113-0.333; 48% agreement). The mean ASA scores for gastroenterologists compared with other gastroenterologists were 2.26 ± 0.5 and 2.26 ± 0.44, respectively, with poor agreement (weighted kappa index 0.200, 95% CI 0.108-0.389; 68% agreement). Agreement on ASA scores was only moderate between the gastroenterologist and himself or herself (weighted kappa index 0.464, 95% CI 0.183-0.745; 75% agreement)., Conclusions: Gastroenterologists performing preprocedure assessments of ASA scores have fair agreement with anesthesiologists, poor agreement with other gastroenterologists, and only moderate agreement with themselves. Given this level of inaccuracy, it appears that the ASA score pre-endoscopy is of limited significance.

Background/aim: Although international guidelines in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management are currently available, variations in IBD care still exist. The aim of this study was to determine the extent of the variation in IBD care among Saudi pediatric gastroenterologists., Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among all pediatric gastroenterologists who were members of the Saudi Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition (SASPGHAN) from August 2015 to December 2015. The questionnaire included items on demographic characteristics and utilization of different diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in IBD care., Results: Of the 45 registered pediatric gastroenterologists surveyed, 37 (82%) returned the survey from 20 centers across the country; 75.7% were practicing in tertiary care centers. There was a considerable variation in the use of different diagnostic tests during the initial evaluation of the disease. Utilization of calprotectin assays, magnetic resonance imaging enterography, and bone densitometry seemed to vary the most between physicians practicing at tertiary and secondary care centers. There were statistically significant differences in the prescription of biological therapy between the two groups., Conclusions: We found a considerable variation in the use of different diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the management of pediatric IBD patients. Such variations could lead to unintended differences in patient outcomes. Implementation of the available evidence-based guidelines may limit such variations and ultimately could improve the quality of IBD care provided.

Background: As variation in care has previously been linked to quality, we aimed to describe variations in inflammatory bowel diseases care by gastroenterology (GI) practice setting., Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study within the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of America Partners and used bivariate analyses to compare patient characteristics by GI practice setting (GI-academic [GIA], GI-private, or GI-other). Regression models were used to describe the effects of provider type on steroid use, disease activity, and the quality of life., Results: The study included 12,083 patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (7576 with Crohn's disease [CD] and 4507 with ulcerative colitis [UC]). Nearly 95% reported visiting a GI provider annually. Also, CD patients seen by GIA were younger, better educated, used less 5-aminosalicylate agents, and had higher biologic and immunomodulator use (P < 0.001 for all). On multivariate analysis of CD patients, GIA used less steroids when compared with GI-private (odds ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.06) or GI-other (odds ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.89). GIA patients were more likely to be in remission, have flu vaccine, and have better quality of life. UC patients seen by GIA were younger, had more hospitalizations, and previous surgery (P < 0.001 for all). No differences existed for steroid use, remission, flu vaccine, or quality of life for UC care on bivariate or multivariate analyses., Conclusions: Significant variations in care patterns and quality measures exist for CD across GI provider types, without similar variation in UC care. Interventions to reduce variations in care could improve the quality of care in CD.

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patient populations face similar risks of chronic immunosuppression including corticosteroid use. We compared the receipt of preventive services between IBD and RA populations according to published quality metrics., Methods: We defined a single-center cohort of patients with IBD or RA receiving specialty and primary care. Electronic health record abstraction assessed quality metrics, sociodemographics, comorbidity, and utilization. Comparisons used multivariate odds ratios and Student's t-tests., Results: 218 RA and 190 IBD patients were included. In multivariate analysis, IBD patients were less likely to receive pneumococcal vaccination (OR=0.29, 95% CI: 0.11-0.85), while RA patients underwent glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis screening more often (100% vs. 82.5%, p = 0.023)., Conclusions: Gastroenterologists can improve care quality for IBD patients by assuming greater responsibility for preventive care in IBD patients and/or collaborating with primary care and health systems to improve preventive care delivery.

Intraoperative assessment of pancreatic parenchymal margin during pancreatectomies is challenging and misinterpretation by the pathologist is a cause of incorrect frozen section (FS) diagnosis. Although the current literature supports that pancreatic margin FS diagnosis and its accuracy has no impact on the patient outcome for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients and reexcision in an attempt to achieve a negative intraoperative pancreatic margin after positive FS is not associated with increased overall survival; still it remains a routine practice in many institutions. To this end, we sought to assess the interobserver variation and accuracy of FS diagnosis between subspecialized gastrointestinal/pancreatobiliary (GI) and general pathologists. Seventy seven consecutive pancreatic parenchymal margin FSs performed on pancreatectomies for PDAC from 2010 to 2013 were retrieved at our institution. These were retrospectively evaluated by 2 GI and 2 general pathologists independently without knowledge of the original FS diagnosis or the final diagnosis. The specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of GI versus general pathologist was 97.8% versus 87.5%, 61.1% versus 66.7%, 78.6% versus 41.4%, 95% versus 95.2%, and 93.5% versus 85.1%, respectively. The interobserver agreement between GI and general pathologists was fair (κ = .337, P < .001). The interobserver agreement between 2 GI pathologists was fair (κ = .373, P = .0005) and between 2 general pathologists was slight (κ = .195, P = .042). Although overall accuracy of subspecialized GI pathologists was higher than that of general pathologists, none had an accuracy of 100%. Our study reaffirms the challenging nature of these FSs., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Background . Audit and feedback (A/F) reports are one of the few knowledge translation activities that can effect change in physician behavior. In this study, we pilot-tested an endoscopist A/F report to elicit opinions about the proposed report's usability, acceptability and usefulness, and implications for knowledge translation. Methods . Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with eleven endoscopists in Ontario, Canada. We tested an A/F report template comprising 9 validated, accepted colonoscopy quality indicators populated with simulated data. Interview transcripts were coded using techniques such as constant comparison and themes were identified inductively over several team meetings. Results . Four interrelated themes were identified: (1) overall perceptions of the A/F report; (2) accountability and consequences for poor performance; (3) motivation to change/improve skills; and (4) training for performance enhancement and available resources. The A/F report was well received; however, participants cited some possible threats to the report's effectiveness including the perceived threat of loss of privileges or licensing and the potential for the data to be dismissed. Conclusions . Participants agreed that A/F has the potential to improve colonoscopy performance. However, in order to be effective in changing physician behavior, A/F must be thoughtfully implemented with attention to the potential concerns of its recipients., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.