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.