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.

Implementation of indication-based antibiotic order sentences improves antibiotic use in emergency departments.

INTRODUCTION: Prior data have suggested that suboptimal antibiotic prescribing in the emergency department (ED) is common for uncomplicated lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI), urinary tract infections (UTI), and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). The objective of this study was to measure the effect of indication-based antibiotic order sentences (AOS) on optimal antibiotic prescribing in the ED. METHODS: This was an IRB-approved quasi-experiment of adults prescribed antibiotics in EDs for uncomplicated LRTI, UTI, or ABSSSI from January to June 2019 (pre-implementation) and September to December 2021 (post-implementation). AOS implementation occurred in July 2021. AOS are lean process, electronic discharge prescriptions retrievable by name or indication within the discharge order field. The primary outcome was optimal prescribing, defined as correct antibiotic selection, dose, and duration per local and national guidelines. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were performed; multivariable logistic regression was used to determine variables associated with optimal prescribing. RESULTS: A total of 294 patients were included: 147 pre-group and 147 post-group. Overall optimal prescribing improved from 12 (8%) to 34 (23%) (P < 0.001). Individual components of optimal prescribing were optimal selection at 90 (61%) vs 117 (80%) (P < 0.001), optimal dose at 99 (67%) vs 115 (78%) (P = 0.036), and optimal duration at 38 (26%) vs 50 (34%) (P = 0.13) for pre- and post-group, respectively. AOS was independently associated with optimal prescribing after multivariable logistic regression analysis (adjOR, 3.6; 95%CI,1.7-7.2). A post-hoc analysis showed low uptake of AOS by ED prescribers. CONCLUSIONS: AOS are an efficient and promising strategy to enhance antimicrobial stewardship in the ED.

Changes in Japanese physicians' relationships with the pharmaceutical industry between 2008 and 2021: A national survey.

BACKGROUND: A national survey we conducted in 2008 showed that many Japanese physicians interacted with and received gifts from pharmaceutical representatives (PRs) and had a positive attitude toward relationships with PRs. The revised promotion code of the Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association in 2019 prohibited the provision of non-educational promotional aids including sticky notes, mouse pads, and calendars. During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, face-to-face meetings were socially restricted. This study assessed the extent of current Japanese physicians' involvement in pharmaceutical promotional activities and their attitudes toward relationships with PRs and to ascertain any changes between 2008 and 2021. We also examined the factors that predicted positive attitudes toward gifts from PRs. METHODS: From January to March 2021, we conducted a national mail survey of Japanese physicians in seven specialties: internal medicine, surgery, orthopedics, pediatrics, obstetrics-gynecology, psychiatry, and ophthalmology. RESULTS: There were 1636 participants and the response rate was 63.2%. Most physicians met face-to-face with PRs (78.8%), whereas only a minority received meals outside the workplace (4.5%). PRs were thought to have an important role in continuing medical education (66.1%) and to provide accurate information about new drugs (74.2%). Opinions were divided on the appropriateness of gifts from PRs. Most thought that stationery and meals provided by the industry did not affect prescribing behavior (89.7% and 75.8%, respectively). Factors that predicted a positive attitude toward gifts from PRs were male, orthopedic specialty vs. internal medicine, more interactions with PRs, a positive attitude toward informational value, and no rules banning meetings with PRs. CONCLUSION: Involvement in pharmaceutical promotional activities is still common among practicing physicians in Japan, although the extent of the involvement had declined. Rules banning meetings with PRs appear to continue being effective at limiting a physician's involvement with promotional activities and their critical attitudes toward gifts from PRs.

Estimated Reductions in Opioid Overdose Deaths With Sustainment of Public Health Interventions in 4 US States.

Importance: In 2021, more than 80 000 US residents died from an opioid overdose. Public health intervention initiatives, such as the Helping to End Addiction Long-term (HEALing) Communities Study (HCS), are being launched with the goal of reducing opioid-related overdose deaths (OODs). Objective: To estimate the change in the projected number of OODs under different scenarios of the duration of sustainment of interventions, compared with the status quo. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytical model simulated the opioid epidemic in the 4 states participating in the HCS (ie, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio) from 2020 to 2026. Participants were a simulated population transitioning from opioid misuse to opioid use disorder (OUD), overdose, treatment, and relapse. The model was calibrated using 2015 to 2020 data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and other sources for each state. The model accounts for reduced initiation of medications for OUD (MOUDs) and increased OODs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Exposure: Increasing MOUD initiation by 2- or 5-fold, improving MOUD retention to the rates achieved in clinical trial settings, increasing naloxone distribution efforts, and furthering safe opioid prescribing. An initial 2-year duration of interventions was simulated, with potential sustainment for up to 3 additional years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Projected reduction in number of OODs under different combinations and durations of sustainment of interventions. Results: Compared with the status quo, the estimated annual reduction in OODs at the end of the second year of interventions was 13% to 17% in Kentucky, 17% to 27% in Massachusetts, 15% to 22% in New York, and 15% to 22% in Ohio. Sustaining all interventions for an additional 3 years was estimated to reduce the annual number of OODs at the end of the fifth year by 18% to 27% in Kentucky, 28% to 46% in Massachusetts, 22% to 34% in New York, and 25% to 41% in Ohio. The longer the interventions were sustained, the better the outcomes; however, these positive gains would be washed out if interventions were not sustained. Conclusions and Relevance: In this decision analytical model study of the opioid epidemic in 4 US states, sustained implementation of interventions, including increased delivery of MOUDs and naloxone supply, was found to be needed to reduce OODs and prevent deaths from increasing again.

We need to talk: The urgent conversation on chronic pain, mental health, prescribing patterns and the opioid crisis.

The opioid crisis' pathways from first exposure onwards to eventual illnesses and fatalities are multiple, intertwined and difficult to dissect. Here, we offer a multidisciplinary appraisal of the relationships among mental health, chronic pain, prescribing patterns worldwide and the opioid crisis. Because the opioid crisis' toll is especially harsh on young people, emphasis is given on data regarding the younger strata of the population. Because analgesic opioid prescription constitute a recognised entry point towards misuse, opioid use disorder, and ultimately overdose, prescribing patterns across different countries are examined as a modifiable hazard factor along these pathways of risk. Psychiatrists are called to play a more compelling role in this urgent conversation, as they are uniquely placed to provide synthesis and lead action among the different fields of knowledge and care that lie at the crossroads of the opioid crisis. Psychiatrists are also ideally positioned to gauge and disseminate the foundations for diagnosis and clinical management of mental conditions associated with chronic pain, including the identification of hazardous and protective factors. It is our hope to spark more interdisciplinary exchanges and encourage psychiatrists worldwide to become leaders in an urgent conversation with interlocutors from the clinical and basic sciences, policy makers and stakeholders including clients and their families.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on chronic pain and opioid use in marginalized populations: A scoping review.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a variable effect on vulnerable populations, including patients with chronic pain who rely on opioid treatment or have comorbid opioid use disorder. Limited access to care due to isolation measures may lead to increased pain severity, worse mental health symptoms, and adverse opioid-related outcomes. This scoping review aimed to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the dual epidemics of chronic pain and opioids in marginalized communities worldwide. Methods: Searches of primary databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and PsycINFO were performed in March 2022, restricting the publication date to December 1, 2019. The search yielded 685 articles. After title and abstract screening, 526 records were screened by title and abstract, 87 through full-text review, of which 25 articles were included in the final analysis. Results: Our findings illuminate the differential distribution of pain burden across marginalized groups and how it serves to heighten existing disparities. Service disruptions due to social distancing orders and infrastructural limitations prevented patients from receiving the care they needed, resulting in adverse psychological and physical health outcomes. Efforts to adapt to COVID-19 circumstances included modifications to opioid prescribing regulations and workflows and expanded telemedicine services. Conclusion: Results have implications for the prevention and management of chronic pain and opioid use disorder, such as challenges in adopting telemedicine in low-resource settings and opportunities to strengthen public health and social care systems with a multidisciplinary and multidimensional approach.

HPV vaccine recommendations by age: A survey of providers in federally qualified health centers.

Clinician recommendation remains a critical factor in improving HPV vaccine uptake. Clinicians practicing in federally qualified health centers were surveyed between October 2021 and July 2022. Clinicians were asked how they recommended HPV vaccination for patients aged 9-10, 11-12, 13-18, 19-26, and 27-45 y (strongly recommend, offer but do not recommend strongly, discuss only if the patient initiates the conversation, or recommend against). Descriptive statistics were assessed, and exact binomial logistic regression analyses were utilized to examine factors associated with HPV vaccination recommendation in 9-10-y-old patients. Respondents (n = 148) were primarily female (85%), between the ages of 30-39 (38%), white, non-Hispanic (62%), advanced practice providers (55%), family medicine specialty (70%), and practicing in the Northeast (63%). Strong recommendations for HPV vaccination varied by age: 65% strongly recommended for ages 9-10, 94% for ages 11-12, 96% for ages 13-18, 82% for age 19-26, and 26% for ages 27-45 y. Compared to Women's Health/OBGYN specialty, family medicine clinicians were less likely to recommend HPV vaccination at ages 9-10 (p = .03). Approximately two-thirds of clinicians practicing in federally qualified health centers or safety net settings strongly recommend HPV vaccine series initiation at ages 9-10. Additional research is needed to improve recommendations in younger age groups.

A multi-institutional exploration of emergency medicine physicians' attitudes and behaviours on antibiotic use during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the epidemiology of upper respiratory tract infections (URTI) and the disease profile of patients attending the emergency department (ED). Hence, we sought to explore the changes in ED physicians' attitudes and behaviours in four EDs in Singapore. METHODS: We employed a sequential mixed-methods approach (quantitative survey followed by in-depth interviews). Principal component analysis was performed to derive latent factors, followed by multivariable logistic regression to explore the independent factors associated with high antibiotic prescribing. Interviews were analysed using the deductive-inductive-deductive framework. We derive five meta-inferences by integrating the quantitative and qualitative findings with an explanatory bidirectional framework. RESULTS: We obtained 560 (65.9%) valid responses from the survey and interviewed 50 physicians from various work experiences. ED physicians were twice as likely to report high antibiotic prescribing rates pre-COVID-19 pandemic than during the pandemic (AOR = 2.12, 95% CI 1.32 to 3.41, p = 0.002). Five meta-inferences were made by integrating the data: (1) Less pressure to prescribe antibiotics due to reduced patient demand and more patient education opportunities; (2) A higher proportion of ED physicians self-reported lower antibiotic prescribing rates during the COVID-19 pandemic but their perception of the overall outlook on antibiotic prescribing rates varied; (3) Physicians who were high antibiotic prescribers during the COVID-19 pandemic made less effort for prudent antibiotic prescribing as they were less concerned about antimicrobial resistance; (4) the COVID-19 pandemic did not change the factors that lowered the threshold for antibiotic prescribing; (5) the COVID-19 pandemic did not change the perception that the public's knowledge of antibiotics is poor. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported antibiotic prescribing rates decreased in the ED during the COVID-19 pandemic due to less pressure to prescribe antibiotics. The lessons and experiences learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic can be incorporated into public and medical education in the war against antimicrobial resistance going forward. Antibiotic use should also be monitored post-pandemic to assess if the changes are sustained.

Prescription of antibiotics by general practitioners for patients with a diagnosis of SARS- CoV-2 infection: Analysis of an electronic French health record.

OBJECTIVE: To define the factors associated with overprescription of antibiotics by general practitioners (GPs) for patients diagnosed with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS: Anonymised electronic prescribing records of 1370 GPs were analysed. Diagnosis and prescriptions were retrieved. The initiation rate by GP for 2020 was compared with 2017-2019. Prescribing habits of GPs who initiated antibiotics for > 10% of COVID-19 patients were compared with those who did not. Regional differences in prescribing habits of GPs who had consulted at least one COVID-19 patient were also analysed. RESULTS: For the March-April 2020 period, GPs who initiated antibiotics for > 10% of COVID-19 patients had more consultations than those who did not. They also more frequently prescribed antibiotics for non-COVID-19 patients consulting with rhinitis and broad-spectrum antibiotics for treating cystitis. Finally, GPs in the Île-de-France region saw more COVID-19 patients and more frequently initiated antibiotics. General practitioners in southern France had a higher but non-significant ratio of azithromycin initiation rate over total antibiotic initiation rate. CONCLUSION: This study identified a subset of GPs with overprescribing profiles for COVID-19 and other viral infections; they also tended to prescribe broad-spectrum antibiotics for a long duration. There were also regional differences concerning antibiotic initiation rates and the ratio of azithromycin prescribed. It will be necessary to evaluate the evolution of prescribing practices during subsequent waves.

Opioid prescribing among aged care residents during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: an analysis using general practice health records in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use is common among adults 65 years and older, while long-term use of opioids remains controversial and poses risks of drug dependence and other adverse events. The acute disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has created new challenges and barriers to healthcare access, particularly for long-term care residents. Australia had a relatively low incidence and deaths due to COVID-19 during the first year of the pandemic compared to most OECD countries. In this context, we examined opioid prescribing rates and their dosage in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) before (2019) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020) from March to December in Australia. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort using general practice electronic health records. This includes 17,304 RACF residents aged 65 years and over from 361 general practices in New South Wales and Victoria. Number of opioid prescriptions and percentage of opioids over 50 mg/day of oral morphine equivalent (OME) were described. Multivariate generalized estimating equations were applied to estimate odds ratios [aORs (95% confidence intervals)] for 1) opioids prescribed per consultation and 2) prescription opioids over 50 mg/day OME. RESULTS: In 2020 among 11,154 residents, 22.8% of 90,897 total prescriptions were opioids, and of the opioids, 11.3% were over 50 mg/day OME. In 2019 among 10,506 residents, 18.8% of 71,829 total prescriptions were opioids, of which 10.3% were over 50 mg/day OME. Year [2020 vs. 2019: aOR (95% CI):1.50 (1.44, 1.56); 1.29 (1.15, 1.46)] and regionality [rural/regional vs. metropolitan: 1.37 (1.26, 1.49); 1.40 (1.14, 1.71)] were associated with higher odds of prescription opioids and OME > 50 mg/day, respectively. Similar results were found when limited to the same residents (n = 7,340) recorded in both years. CONCLUSIONS: Higher prescription rates of opioids were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 than in 2019 in Australian RACFs. The higher odds of prescription opioids and higher dosing in rural/regional than metropolitan areas indicate a widening of the gap in the quality of pain management during the pandemic. Our findings contribute to the limited data that indicate increased opioid prescriptions in long-term care facilities, likely to continue while COVID-19 pandemic restrictions remain.

Comparison of Postpartum Opioid Prescriptions Before vs During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic substantially disrupted routine health care and exacerbated existing barriers to health care access. Although postpartum women frequently experience pain that interferes with activities of daily living, which is often successfully treated with prescription opioid analgesics, they are also at high risk for opioid misuse. Objective: To compare postpartum opioid prescription fills after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 with fills before the pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study of 460 371 privately insured postpartum women who delivered a singleton live newborn between July 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020, postpartum opioid fills before March 1, 2020, were compared with fills after March 1, 2020. Statistical analysis was performed from December 1, 2021, to September 15, 2022. Exposure: COVID-19 pandemic onset in March 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was postpartum opioid fills, defined as patient fills of opioid prescriptions during the 6 months after birth. Opioid prescriptions were explored in terms of 5 measures: mean number of fills per person, mean filled morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) per day, mean days supplied, percentage of patients filling a prescription for a schedule II opioid, and percentage of patients filling a prescription for a schedule III or higher opioid. Results: Among 460 371 postpartum women (mean [SD] age at delivery, 29.0 [10.8] years), those who gave birth to a single, live newborn after March 2020 were 2.8 percentage points more likely to fill an opioid prescription than expected based on the preexisting trend (forecasted, 35.0% [95% CI, 34.0%-35.9%]; actual, 37.8% [95% CI, 36.8%-38.7%]). The COVID-19 period was also associated with an increase in MMEs per day (forecasted mean [SD], 34.1 [2.0] [95% CI, 33.6-34.7]; actual mean [SD], 35.8 [1.8] [95% CI, 35.3-36.3]), number of opioid fills per patient (forecasted, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.48-0.51]; actual, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.51-0.55]), and percentage of patients filling a schedule II opioid prescription (forecasted, 28.7% [95% CI, 27.9%-29.6%]; actual, 31.5% [95% CI, 30.6%-32.3%]). There was no significant association with days' suppy of opioids per prescription or percentage of patients filling a prescription for a schedule III or higher opioid. Results stratified by delivery modality showed that the observed increases were larger for patients who delivered by cesarean birth than those delivering vaginally. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study suggests that the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with significant increases in postpartum opioid fills. Increases in opioid prescriptions may be associated with increased risk of opioid misuse, opioid use disorder, and opioid-related overdose among postpartum women.

Point prevalence audit surveys of respiratory tract infection consultations and antibiotic prescribing in primary care before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are the most common reason for prescribing antibiotics in general practice. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted on antibiotic prescribing and delivery of primary care in Ireland. OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality of antibiotic prescribing, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and identify opportunities for antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in Ireland. METHODS: Point prevalence audit surveys for RTI consultations were conducted as part of a European study at three time periods: January-February 2020, March-May 2020 and March-May 2021. Antibiotic prescribing was assessed and comparisons made between the three time periods. RESULTS: In total, 765 consultations were recorded, which were mainly face to face before the pandemic, but changed to predominantly remote consultations during the pandemic surveys in 2020 and 2021 (82% and 75%). Antibiotics were prescribed in 54% of RTI consultations before the pandemic. During pandemic surveys, this dropped to 23% in 2020 and 21% in 2021. There was a decrease in prescribing of Red (reserve) agents in 2021. Assessment against indication-specific quality indicators showed a high proportion of consultations for bronchitis and tonsillitis resulting in an antibiotic prescription (67% and 85%). Point-of-care testing (POCT) to aid diagnosis of RTIs were utilized in less than 1% of consultations. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a reduction in antibiotic prescribing. Opportunities identified to support AMS in primary care in Ireland are targeted initiatives to reduce antibiotic prescribing for bronchitis and tonsillitis and introducing POCT to support appropriate antibiotic prescribing.

Baseline Inappropriate Antibiotic Use in Primary Care Patients with Viral Respiratory Tract Infections with 2019 and 2020.

Context: Respiratory tract infection (RTI) is the leading cause of avoidable antimicrobial use in primary care. How the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted antibiotic prescribing practices across Canada is unknown. The purpose of this study was to examine rates of antibiotic prescribing for RTI in primary care during the first year of the pandemic (2020), compared to baseline in 2019. Study Design and Analysis: Cross sectional study. Dataset: Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network electronic medical record data from sites in British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. Population Studied: Patients that met the case definition criteria for an RTI or a Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) in 2019, and in 2020. Outcome measures: We examined oral antibiotic prescribing for patients who were identified as having a primary care visit for RTI. The same analysis was repeated for urinary tract infection (UTI) as a tracer condition. The antibiotic use considered avoidable for RTI was defined by Choosing Wisely Canada. Results: A total of 1,692,876 patients with a valid birth year and sex and at least one visit to primary care in 2019 and 2020 were included. Patient visits for RTI decreased from 2.3% in 2019 to 1.6% in 2020 (p<.0001), as did patient visits for UTI (1.1% vs 0.7%, p<.0001). In 2019, 28.0% of patients visits for RTI were prescribed an antibiotic, and this proportion decreased significantly to 20.6% in 2020 (<.0001). The drop in antibiotic prescriptions for RTI was driven by a decrease in prescribing for common cold (13.6% vs. 11.3%, <.0001) and for acute bronchitis/asthma (15.2% vs. 7.3%, p<.0001). In comparison, antibiotic prescribing for visits related to UTI increased marginally between 2019 and 2020 (71.6% vs. 72.3%, p=0.007). Conclusions: A significant decrease in antibiotic prescribing for RTI across primary care was observed during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, likely related to the changes in epidemiology and care delivery models in primary care. CPCSSN can provide pan-Canadian surveillance of antibiotic prescribing practices in primary care that can be used for provider feedback and quality improvement.