Implications of COVID-19 for the busy gastroenterologist.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infection caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) originated in China in December 2020 and declared pandemic by WHO. This coronavirus mainly spreads through the respiratory tract and enters cells through angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). The clinical symptoms of COVID-19 patients include fever, cough, and fatigue. Gastrointestinal symptoms (diarrhea, anorexia, and vomiting) may be present in 50% of patients and may be associated with worst prognosis. Other risk factors are older age, male gender, and underlying chronic diseases. Mitigation measures are essential to reduce the number of people infected. Hospitals are a place of increased SARS-CoV-2 exposure. This has implications in the organization of healthcare services and specifically endoscopy departments. Patients and healthcare workers safety must be optimized in this new reality. Comprehension of COVID-19 gastrointestinal manifestations and implications of SARS-CoV-2 in the management of patients with gastrointestinal diseases, under or not immunosuppressant therapies, is essential. In this review, we summarized the latest research progress and major societies recommendations regarding the implications of COVID-19 in gastroenterology, namely the adaptations that gastroenterology/endoscopy departments and professionals must do in order to optimize the provided assistance, as well as the implications that this infection will have, in particularly vulnerable patients such as those with chronic liver disease and inflammatory bowel disease under or not immunosuppressant therapies.

Supply and quality of colonoscopy according to the characteristics of gastroenterologists in the French population-based colorectal-cancer screening program.

BACKGROUND: Since its complete roll-out in 2009, the French colorectal cancer screening program (CRCSP) experienced 3 major constraints [use of a less efficient Guaiac-test (gFOBT), stopping the supply of Fecal-Immunochemical-Test kits (FIT), and suspension of the program due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)] affecting its effectiveness. AIM: To describe the impact of the constraints in terms of changes in the quality of screening-colonoscopy (Quali-Colo). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included screening-colonoscopies performed by gastroenterologists between Jan-2010 and Dec-2020 in people aged 50-74 living in Ile-de-France (France). The changes in Quali-colo (Proportion of colonoscopies performed beyond 7 mo (Colo_7 mo), Frequency of serious adverse events (SAE) and Colonoscopy detection rate) were described in a cohort of Gastroenterologists who performed at least one colonoscopy over each of the four periods defined according to the chronology of the constraints [gFOBT: Normal progress of the CRCSP using gFOBT (2010-2014); FIT: Normal progress of the CRCSP using FIT (2015-2018); STOP-FIT: Year (2019) during which the CRCSP experienced the cessation of the supply of test kits; COVID: Program suspension due to the COVID-19 health crisis (2020)]. The link between each dependent variable (Colo_7 mo; SAE occurrence, neoplasm detection rate) and the predictive factors was analyzed in a two-level multivariate hierarchical model. RESULTS: The 533 gastroenterologists (cohort) achieved 21509 screening colonoscopies over gFOBT period, 38352 over FIT, 7342 over STOP-FIT and 7995 over COVID period. The frequency of SAE did not change between periods (gFOBT: 0.3%; FIT: 0.3%; STOP-FIT: 0.3%; and COVID: 0.2%; P = 0.10). The risk of Colo_7 mo doubled between FIT [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.2 (1.1; 1.2)] and STOP-FIT [aOR: 2.4 (2.1; 2.6)]; then, decreased by 40% between STOP-FIT and COVID [aOR: 2.0 (1.8; 2.2)]. Regardless of the period, this Colo_7 mo's risk was twice as high for screening colonoscopy performed in a public hospital [aOR: 2.1 (1.3; 3.6)] compared to screening-colonoscopy performed in a private clinic. The neoplasm detection, which increased by 60% between gFOBT and FIT [aOR: 1.6 (1.5; 1.7)], decreased by 40% between FIT and COVID [aOR: 1.1 (1.0; 1.3)]. CONCLUSION: The constraints likely affected the time-to-colonoscopy as well as the colonoscopy detection rate without impacting the SAE's occurrence, highlighting the need for a respectable reference time-to-colonoscopy in CRCSP.

Gastroenterologists attitude in various clinical settings in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: An online Uni-National Israeli Survey.

ABSTRACT: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted our clinical practice. Many gastroenterologists have changed their attitudes toward various gastroenterological clinical settings. The aim of the present study is to explore the gastroenterologist's attitudes in several clinical settings encountered in the clinical practice.An online based survey was completed by 101 of 250 Israeli gastroenterologists (40.5%).Most of the participants were males (76.2%), and most of them were in the age range of 40 to 50 (37.6%). For all questionnaire components, the 2 most common chosen options were "I perform endoscopy with N95 mask, gloves and gown protection in a standard endoscopy room without preendoscopy severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing" and "Tend to postpone endoscopy until SARS-CoV-2 test is performed because of fear from being infected, or virus spreading in the endoscopy suite." Notably, 12 (11.9%) gastroenterologists were infected by Coronavirus disease 2019 during their work. Classifying the clinical settings to either elective and non-elective, most gastroenterologists (77.4%) chose the attitude of "I perform endoscopy with N95 mask, gloves and gown protection in a standard endoscopy room without SARS-COV-2 testing" in the nonelective settings as compared to 54.2% for the elective settings, (P < .00001), whereas 32.9% of the responders chose the attitude of "Tend to postpone endoscopy until SARS-COV-2 test is performed because of fear from being infected, or virus spreading in the endoscopy suite" in the elective settings (P < .00001).Gastroenterologists' attitude in various gastroenterological settings was based on the clinical indication. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term consequences of the different attitudes.

Australasian paediatric gastroenterologist practices of coeliac disease diagnosis before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM: To explore the perceptions and practices of Australasian paediatric gastroenterologists in diagnosing coeliac disease (CD) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Paediatric gastroenterologists in Australasia were invited via email to complete an anonymous online questionnaire over a 2-week period in 2021. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 39 respondents: 33 from Australia and six from New Zealand (NZ) equating to a 66% response rate. Thirty-four (87%) of the 39 respondents reported they currently practised non-biopsy diagnosis of CD in eligible children, while the rest diagnosed CD using biopsy confirmation only. All NZ respondents practised non-biopsy CD diagnosis. A majority of responders (76%) who practised non-biopsy CD diagnosis followed the 2020 European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) guidelines. Twenty-two (56%) respondents reported that they started using a non-biopsy CD diagnosis protocol before the pandemic and did not change their practice during the pandemic, 10 (26%) started diagnosing non-biopsy CD during the pandemic, 5 (13%) stated their practices of CD were not impacted by the pandemic and 2 (5%) did not respond on whether the pandemic changed their practice. CONCLUSION: The majority of Australasian gastroenterologist respondents reported they routinely utilised the 2020 ESPGHAN diagnostic criteria in eligible children; half of them started prior to the pandemic and another quarter started this approach due to the pandemic. A minority of practitioners routinely rely only on biopsy confirmation to diagnose CD.

Palliative Care Always: Hepatology-Virtual Primary Palliative Care Training for Hepatologists.

Palliative care (PC) benefits patients with serious illness including end-stage liver disease (ESLD). As part of a cluster randomized trial, hepatologists were trained to deliver primary palliative care to patients with ESLD using an online course, Palliative Care Always: Hepatology (PCA:Hep). Here we present a multimethod formative evaluation (feasibility, knowledge acquisition, self-efficacy, and practice patterns) of PCA:Hep. Feasibility was measured by completion of coursework and achieving a course grade of >80%. Knowledge acquisition was measured through assessments before and throughout the course. Pre/post-course surveys were conducted to determine self-efficacy and practice patterns. The hepatologists (n = 39) enrolled in a 12-week online course and spent 1-3 hours on the course weekly. The course was determined to be feasible as 97% successfully completed the course and 100% passed. The course was acceptable to participants; 91.7 % reported a positive course experience and satisfaction with knowledge gained (91.6%). The pre/post knowledge assessment showed an improvement of 6.0% (pre 85.9% to post 91.9%, 95% CI [2.8, 9.2], P = 0.001). Self-efficacy increased significantly (P < 0.001) in psychological symptom management, hospice, and psychosocial support. A year after training, over 80% of the hepatologists reported integrating a variety of PC skills into routine patient care. Conclusion: PCA:Hep is feasible, acceptable, and improves learner knowledge and confidence in palliative care skills. This is a viable method to teach primary PC skills to specialists caring for patients with ESLD.

Ensuring High and Equitable COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Among Patients With IBD.

The recent emergency use authorization of a third COVID-19 vaccine means that most patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) will soon be eligible to be vaccinated. Gastroenterology clinicians should be prepared to address patients' concerns regarding safety and efficacy of vaccines. They should also strongly recommend that all their patients be vaccinated with a COVID-19 vaccine. Additionally, they should be prepared to educate patients about logistics that will result in successful vaccination completion. All these measures will be crucial to ensure high uptake among their patients with IBD.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine acceptance among gastroenterologists and inflammatory bowel disease patients: VACUNEII project.

INTRODUCTION: Several vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are currently in use and are recommended in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. Data are scarce about the gastroenterologists and IBD patient's acceptance of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. The aim of the study was to evaluate the intention to get vaccination with SARS-CoV-2 vaccine among IBD patients from gastroenterologists and patient's perspective. METHODS: An online anonymous survey was sent to 8000 patients from ACCU-Spain and 1000 members of the GETECCU. Three invitations were sent between October-December 2020. Descriptive analyses were performed, comparing physicians and patients responses by standard statistical analyses. RESULTS: 144 gastroenterologists [63% female, mean age 43 years (SD 9.5)], and 1302 patients [72% female, mean age 43 years (SD 12)] responded to the survey. 95% of the physicians recommended SARS-CoV-2 vaccine for IBD patients and 87% consider that their vaccination strategies has not changed after the pandemic compared to 12% who considered that they currently refer more patients to vaccination. Regarding to IBD patients, only 43% of patients were willing to receive the vaccine and 43% were not sure. Male sex (p<0.001) and mesalazine treatment (p=0.021) were positively associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccine acceptance. After multivariate analysis, only male sex was significantly associated with vaccination intent (OR=1.6; 95% confidence interval=1.2-2.0; p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Gastroenterologists and patient's perspective about SARS-CoV-2 are different. Future efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccine and decrease unfounded beliefs among IBD patients are needed.

Twelve Months with COVID-19: What Gastroenterologists Need to Know.

Corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) is the latest global pandemic. COVID-19 is mainly transmitted through respiratory droplets and, apart from respiratory symptoms, patients often present with gastrointestinal symptoms and liver involvement. Given the high percentage of COVID-19 patients that present with gastrointestinal symptoms (GIS), in this review, we report a practical up-to-date reference for the physician in their clinical practice with patients affected by chronic gastrointestinal (GI) diseases (inflammatory bowel disease, coeliac disease, chronic liver disease) at the time of COVID-19. First, we summarised data on the origin and pathogenetic mechanism of SARS-CoV-2. Then, we performed a literature search up to December 2020 examining clinical manifestations of GI involvement. Next, we illustrated and summarised the most recent guidelines on how to adhere to GI procedures (endoscopy, liver biopsy, faecal transplantation), maintaining social distance and how to deal with immunosuppressive treatment. Finally, we focussed on some special conditions such as faecal-oral transmission and gut microbiota. The rapid accumulation of information relating to this condition makes it particularly essential to revise the literature to take account of the most recent publications for medical consultation and patient care.

A Gastroenterologist' clinical experience in COVID 19 and in-hospital mortality and length of stay analysis.

OBJECTIVES: COVID19 pandemic has forced physicians from different specialties to assist cases overload. Our aim is to assess gastroenterologist's assistance in COVID-19 by assessing mortality, ICU admission, and length of stay, and seek for risk factors for in-hospital mortality and longer hospital stay. METHODS: A total of 41 COVID-19 patients assisted by gastroenterologist (GI cohort) and 137 assisted by pulmonologist, internal medicine practitioners, and infectious disease specialists (COVID expert cohort) during October-November 2020 were prospectively collected. Clinical, demographic, imaging, and laboratory markers were collected and compared between both cohorts. Bivariate analysis and logistic regression were performed to search for risk factors of mortality and longer hospital stays. RESULTS: A total of 27 patients died (15.1%), 11 were admitted to ICU (6.1%). There were no differences between cohorts in mortality (14.6% vs 15.4%;p = 0.90), ICU admission (12.1% vs 4%;p = 0.13), and length of stay (6.67 ± 4 vs 7.15 ± 4.5 days; p = 0.58). PaO2/FiO2 on admission (OR 0.991;CI95% 0.984-0.998) and age > 70 (OR 17.54;CI95% 3.93-78.22) were independently related to mortality. Age > 70, history of malignancy, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease were related to longer hospital stays (p < 0.001, p = 0.03, p = 0.04, p = 0.02 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 assistance was similar between gastroenterologist and COVID experts when assessing mortality, ICU admission, and length of stay. Age>70 and decreased PaO2/FiO2 on admission were independent risk factors of mortality. Age and several comorbidities were related to longer hospital stay.

The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on gastroenterologists in Southeast Asia: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has impacted gastroenterology practices worldwide; however, its protracted effects within Southeast Asia were unknown. The primary aim of the study was to determine the impact of the pandemic on clinical demands including burnout among gastroenterologists within the region. The secondary aim was to identify risk factors for burnout and determine regional stressors. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods study. Gastroenterologists were surveyed electronically between September 1 and December 7, 2020, via gastroenterology and endoscopy societies of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected. The 22-item Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS) was used to detect burnout. Quantitative data were non-parametric; non-parametric methods were used for statistical comparisons. Logistic regression was used to determine risk factors for burnout. Content analysis method was used to analyze qualitative data. Ethical approval was obtained. RESULTS: A total of 73.0% reported that they were still significantly affected by the pandemic. Of these, 40.5% reported increased workload and 59.5% decreased workload. Statistically significant differences in weekly working hours, endoscopy, and inpatient volumes were present. No differences were observed in outpatient volumes, likely because of telemedicine. Burnout was common; however, 50.1% of gastroenterologists were unaware of or did not have access to mental health support. This, as well as depression, being a trainee, and public sector work, increased burnout risk significantly. CONCLUSION: The effects of the pandemic are multifaceted, and burnout is common among Southeast Asian gastroenterologists. Safeguards for mental health are suboptimal, and improvements are urgently needed.

Acute physiologic effects of N95 respirator use on gastroenterologists performing simulated colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: During the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic, N95 filtering facepiece respirator (FFR) use was required while performing aerosol-generating procedures. We studied the physiologic effects of N95 FFR use in a cohort of gastroenterologists performing simulated colonoscopies. METHODS: Data collection and comparisons included (1) symptoms and change in vital signs in 12 gastroenterologists performing simulated colonoscopy for 60 minutes while wearing a surgical mask (SM) and faceshield (FS); N95 FFR, SM, and FS; and powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) and (2) respiratory belt plethysmography and continuous electrocardiographic frequency-based heart rate (HR) variability indices including very low frequency power (measures intracardiac sympathetic tone) and low frequency to high frequency ratios (intracardiac sympathetic to vagal ratio) in 11 gastroenterologists performing simulated colonoscopy while wearing an SM (15 minutes), N95 FFR and SM (60 minutes), and SM (15 minutes) in rapid sequence. RESULTS: Ten of 12 gastroenterologists (83%) reported symptoms with N95 FFR use, most commonly breathing difficulty, frustration, fatigue, and headache. Nine of these gastroenterologists (75%) had associated significant HR elevation. Respiratory peak to trough measurement showed a significant increase (F(2) = 7.543, P = .004) during the N95 FFR stage, which resolved after removal of the N95 FFR. Although not statistically different, all gastroenterologists showed a decrease in sympathetic to vagal ratios and an increase in intracardiac sympathetic effects in the N95 FFR stage. PAPR use was better tolerated but was associated with headache and elevated HR in 4 gastroenterologists (33%). CONCLUSIONS: N95 FFR use by gastroenterologists is associated with development of acute physiologic changes and symptoms.