ABSTRACT
Background: The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have been far reaching and have necessitated many changes to healthcare delivery. At the QEII Health Sciences Center physical space limitations for patient check-in and recovery have restricted outpatient endoscopy to 3 of 4 available endoscopy suites. On June 1, 2020 a new system of central endoscopy triage and coordination for the Division of Digestive Care and Endoscopy (DC&E) was implemented in an effort to increase efficiency and maintain patient access to endoscopy. The components of the RESET (Re-introduce Endoscopy Safely and EfficienTly) Plan included a) a new endoscopy coordinator role to manage a common endoscopy waitlist, endoscopist schedules, and booking clerks, b) a modified triage system to improve waitlist consistency, c) a common endoscopy waitlist with patients booked in the next available appointment regardless of endoscopist, d) discontinuation of fixed endoscopy slots for endoscopists, and e) appointment scheduling no sooner than 4-weeks in advance to minimize no-shows and last-minute cancellations. Aims: The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the RESET Plan on the efficiency of DC&E endoscopy. Methods: A retrospective pre- and post-implementation study evaluating the volume and efficiency of outpatient endoscopy before and after implementation of the RESET Plan. The Pre-RESET period included all procedures performed from June 1, 2019 to October 31, 2019. The Post-RESET period included all procedures performed from June 1, 2020 to October 31, 2020. A separate endoscopy suite and triage system is used for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and these cases were excluded. Early effectiveness outcomes were reported including a comparison of the number of endoscopic procedures per week and per list, pre- and post- implementation. Data analysis was primarily descriptive with data expressed as frequencies, means (SD), and proportions (%). Exploratory group comparisons were performed using independent-samples T-Test. Results: During the 5-month Pre-RESET period, 2203 endoscopic procedures were performed. During the Post-RESET period a total of 1920 procedures were performed. Due to pandemic restrictions, there was a 29% decrease in available endoscopy lists from 2019 to 2020. There was a 24% increase in the number procedures performed per endoscopy list, from 6.4 to 8.0 (p=0.004, 95% CI 0.52- 2.53), pre- and post-RESET. Conclusions: While the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare delivery, it has also provided an opportunity to implement health system structure and process changes. The RESET Plan resulted in significant gains in efficiency which largely offset losses in endoscopy throughput imposed by COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. Future research will determine what patient and health system factors most significantly impact system efficiency as well as the cost-effectiveness of the RESET Plan.
ABSTRACT
Background: Severe restrictions on in-person encounters and endoscopic procedures for digestive care have occurred as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. This has exacerbated pre-existing barriers in access to gastroenterology (GI) care across Nova Scotia (NS) for patients and primary healthcare providers (PHCPs). In response, a provincial PHCP-GI consultative service (GUT LINK) was implemented at a single tertiary care center with the goal of supporting PHCPs in the management of non-urgent GI referral conditions. Aims: To implement and evaluate the acceptability, feasibility, appropriateness, and early effectiveness of the GUT LINK PHCP-GI consultation service. Methods: This is an ongoing prospective observational cohort study. All referrals received through the EMR-based referral and triage management system between May and November 2020 that were deemed to be amenable to management within primary care with specialist support were returned to the PHCP with the suggestion to arrange a GUT LINK telephone consultation. GUT LINK appointments were scheduled through an administrative support telephone line with the PHCP and a GI specialist. A post-consultation e-questionnaire was distributed to PHCPs who consented to participate. Feasibility (number of and indication for referrals, PHCP participation rates), acceptability and appropriateness (satisfaction, future use, likelihood to recommend) metrics and outcomes (case resolution, re-referrals, proportion requiring endoscopic investigations) were recorded. Patient charts were reviewed to determine whether the patient ultimately required GI speciality care. Analyses were descriptive and expressed as frequencies, means (+/-SD), medians (+/-SE), and proportions (%). Results: A total of 45 GUT LINK consultations were completed between May and November 2020. Of these, 20% required GI specialist care and 80% have remained within primary care, with a median follow-up of 101 (+/-9.1) days. The indications for GUT LINK consultation included lower GI symptoms (64%), abnormal imaging or investigations (17%), and upper GI symptoms (19%). been completed. All PHCPs reported that GUT LINK consultation was easy to access, while 90% found the advice helpful and 80% reported that that it resolved the issue. Following the GUT LINK appointment, 80% felt they would not need to refer their patient to GI. Conclusions: The implementation of GUT LINK was acceptable, feasible, and improved access to specialist support for management of undifferentiated GI symptoms. Future research will focus on comprehensive stakeholder engagement in order to design, implement, and evaluate GUT LINK PHCP care pathways.
ABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-2019 pandemic continues to restrict access to endoscopy, resulting in delays or cancellation of non-urgent endoscopic procedures. A delay in the removal or exchange of plastic biliary stents may lead to stent occlusion with consensus recommendation of stent removal or exchange at three-month intervals [1-4]. We postulated that delayed plastic biliary stent removal (DPBSR) would increase complication rates. Aims: We aim to report our single-centre experience with complications arising from DPBSR. Methods: This was a retrospective, single-center, observational cohort study. All subjects who had ERCP-guided plastic biliary stent placement in Halifax, Nova Scotia between Dec 2019 and June 2020 were included in the study. DPBSR was defined as stent removal >=90 days from insertion. Four endpoints were assigned to patients: 1. Stent removed endoscopically, 2. Died with stent in-situ (measured from stent placement to documented date of death/last clinical encounter before death), 3. Pending removal (subjects clinically well, no liver enzyme elevation, not expired, endpoint 1 Nov 2020), and 4. Complication requiring urgent reintervention. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to represent duration of stent patency (Fig.1). Results: 102 (47.2%) had plastic biliary stents placed between 2/12/2019 and 29/6/2020. 49 (48%) were female, and the median age was 68 (R 16-91). Median follow-up was 167.5 days, 60 (58.8%) subjects had stent removal, 12 (11.8%) died before replacement, 21 (20.6%) were awaiting stent removal with no complications (median 230d, R 30-332), 9 (8.8%) had complications requiring urgent ERCP. Based on death reports, no deaths were related to stent-related complications. 72(70.6%) of patients had stents in-situ for >= 90 days. In this population, median time to removal was 211.5d (R 91-441d). 3 (4.2%) subjects had stent-related complications requiring urgent ERCP, mean time to complication was 218.3d (R 94-441). Stent removal >=90 days was not associated with complications such as occlusion, cholangitis, and migration (p=1.0). Days of stent in-situ was not associated with occlusion, cholangitis, and migration (p=0.57). Sex (p=0.275), cholecystectomy (p=1.0), cholangiocarcinoma (p=1.0), cholangitis (p=0.68) or pancreatitis (p=1.0) six weeks prior to ERCP, benign vs. malignant etiology (p=1.0) were not significantly associated with stent-related complications. Conclusions: Plastic biliary stent longevity may have been previously underestimated. The findings of this study agree with CAG framework recommendations [5] that stent removal be prioritized as elective (P3). Limitations include small sample size that could affect Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Despite prolonged indwelling stent time as a result of COVID-19, we did not observe an increased incidence of stent occlusion or other complications.
ABSTRACT
To evaluate the performance of a clinical-radiological index (RAPID-Covid score) in achieving Safe Discharge (SD) of patients accessing the Emergency Department (ED) with symptoms suggesting Covid-19. Clinical and radiological data were retrospectively collected from 853 consecutive patients admitted to the ED during the pandemics with symptoms suggesting Covid-19. Illness severity was graded with RAPID-Covid score, composed of chest X-ray findings, clinical symptoms and PaO2/FiO(2). Patients with RAPID-Covid score >= 5 were admitted. Primary outcome was SD of patients to home care. SD was defined as survival of the patient, without evidence of second access to ED requiring hospitalization. 212/853 patients were discharged. 27/212 had a score >= 5 but refused admission. 185/212 were discharged with score <5: 147/185 (79,5%) survived and did not re-access ED;1/185 (0,5%) died at home after first ED-dismissal;37/185 (20,0%) had a second access. Of these 15/37 (8,1%) were newly dismissed and one of them (1/15) died at home;22/37 (11,9%) were hospitalized, 1/22 died during hospitalization. SD was obtained in 161/185 patients (87%). Readmissions occurred 5,1 +/- 2,6days from first discharge. Follow-up was 16,7 +/- 6,0days. RAPID-Covid score proves useful for SD of Covid-19 to home care. 6-10days may further increase confidence.
ABSTRACT
Objective: the objective of this study was to describe the cases of paediatric patients with abdominal pain and confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. In Latin American countries the pandemic has had a major impact from the high mortality rate. Ecuador is the fifth most affected country with a rate of 223 deaths per million inhabitants, ranking at the top of the fatality. In the paediatric population, the behavior of COVID-19 remains nonspecific. Materials and methods: an observational, descriptive and retrospective study was conducted, in which patients under the age of 18 were included except for newborns, admitted by abdominal pain and who obtained a confirmed diagnosis COVID-19. Results: 30 patients with confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and abdominal pain were included. The average age was 8.46 years at the predomin of the male sex (70%). In the pain assessment 19 (63%) had a moderate-severe EVA and 11 (37%) Mild EVA. 7 (23.33%) required surgery, 21 (70%) needed a critical care unit, and 1 (3.33%) Died. Conclusions: abdominal pain is a diagnostic challenge in this time of pandemic and should be considered within the possible clinical manifestations of COVID-19 in the paediatric population.