ABSTRACT
Background and Aim: During COVID-19, restrictions to elective endoscopy were introduced worldwide. A reduction in procedures may impact trainees' endoscopy learning. This study aims to assess Australian advanced gastroenterology and general surgery trainees' self-perceived efficacy and knowledge in endoscopy during the pandemic. Methods: All Australian gastroenterology and general surgery trainees in their last 2 years of accredited training were invited to participate through email (2020-2021 and 2021-2022 training cycles). The primary outcome was to assess trainees' self-efficacy and knowledge regarding gastrointestinal endoscopy. Secondary outcomes included subgroup analysis between gastroenterology and general surgery trainees. Self-perceived efficacy was assessed with Likert-scale questions on 20 endoscopy procedures and knowledge was assessed through 21 endoscopy-related multiple choice questions. Results: Eighty-one trainees responded to a self-efficacy questionnaire and 77 responded to the knowledge questionnaire. Over 90% of the trainees were confident or extremely confident in diagnostic endoscopy, but only half demonstrated similar efficacy for therapeutic endoscopy. The efficacy for basic endoscopy procedures was higher for gastroenterology trainees (64.0% vs 51.1%, P < 0.001). Last-year trainee achievement of conjoint committee requirements for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was achieved in 95.8% of gastroenterology trainees versus 22.2% of surgical trainees (P < 0.001). The median score on the knowledge questionnaire was also higher for the gastroenterology subset (90.5% vs 71.4%, P < 0.001). Conclusion: During COVID-19, endoscopy trainees' self-efficacy in endoscopic diagnostic procedures was achieved for most trainees. The differences in self-perceived efficacy and knowledge between gastroenterology and surgical trainees may be reflective of the different opportunities for learning between the two groups.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Telehealth has become the standard of care during the COVID-19 outbreak. This study aimed to assess doctor and patient satisfaction of endoscopy-related telehealth clinics with video consultations. METHODS: A prospective observational study of patients consecutively booked to attend two endoscopy-related telehealth clinics at an ambulatory tertiary care setting was conducted from July to October 2020. Data collected from our previously published study using phone consultations (data collected in April-May 2020) were used as a control arm. The primary outcome (satisfaction) was assessed through the six-question score (6Q_score) as per previous research. Secondary outcomes included failure-to-attend (FTA) rate and perceived necessity of physical examination/in-person follow-up appointment. RESULTS: There were 962 endoscopy clinic appointments between July and October, of which 157 were conducted through video. Data on 127 doctor questionnaires and 94 patient questionnaires were analyzed. The median age (years) of patients reviewed via video [57, interquartile range (IQR) 48-66] was lower than those reviewed via phone (65, IQR 55-74, P < 0.01). Patient average 6Q_score was higher with video compared to phone (85.1% vs 78.4%, P = 0.01), as was doctors' 6Q_score (97.5% vs 91.9%, P = 0.02). FTA rates remained similar between the two assessments (6.4% in April/May and 4.4% between July/October, P = 0.12). The requirement for in-person follow-up/physical examination was identified in two video consultations (1.6%). CONCLUSION: Video consultations during the COVID-19 outbreak demonstrated higher patient and doctor satisfaction compared to phone consultations. There was no significant difference in FTA rates and need for in-person follow-up consultations/physical examination between the telehealth two modalities.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIM: During COVID-19 outbreak, restrictions to in-person consultations were introduced with a rise in telehealth. An indirect benefit of telehealth could be better attendance. This study aimed to assess "failure-to-attend" (FTA) rate and satisfaction for two endoscopy-related compulsory telehealth clinics during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Consecutive patients booked for endoscopy-related telehealth clinics at a tertiary hospital were prospectively assessed. In-person clinic control data were assessed retrospectively. Sample size was calculated to detect an anticipated increase in attendance of 8%. Secondary outcomes included FTA differences between clinics and evaluation of patients and doctors satisfaction. Satisfaction was assessed based on six Likert scale questions used in previous telehealth research and asked to both patients and doctors (6Q_score). This study was exempt from IRB review after institutional IRB review. RESULTS: There were 691 patients booked for appointments in our endoscopy clinics during the study periods (373 in 2020). FTA rates were lowered by half during the compulsory telehealth clinics (12.6% to 6.4%, P < 0.01). The patient 6Q_score was higher for the advanced endoscopy clinic (84.6% vs 73.8%, P < 0.01), while the doctor 6Q_score was similar between both advanced clinics and post endoscopy clinics (91.1% vs 92.5% respectively, P = 0.80). An in-person follow-up consultation was suggested for 3.5% of the appointments, while the necessity of physical examination was flagged in 5.1%. CONCLUSIONS: The use of phone consultations in endoscopy-related clinics during the COVID-19 outbreak has improved FTA rates while demonstrating high satisfaction rates. The need for in-person follow-up consultations and physical examination were low.