Can endoscopic follow-up after acute diverticulitis be rationalised?

BACKGROUND: Acute diverticulitis (AD) is a common cause of presentation to emergency surgical services. Follow-up with endoluminal investigation to exclude colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. Guidelines are increasingly moving to a more restrictive follow-up based on severity of disease and age. The purpose of this observational study was to assess the prevalence of CRC in AD patients and the impact of follow-up on endoscopy services. METHODS: Patients admitted with a diagnosis of AD over a 2-year period were reviewed. The proportion of patients undergoing endoscopic follow-up and the CRC detection rate were recorded. The potential impact of a more conservative approach to follow-up was evaluated. RESULTS: There were 484 patients with AD presenting 546 times (M:F = 198:286; median age = 63 years). 80% of admissions were aged 50 or older. There were 43 emergency interventions in 39 patients (10 percutaneous drain; 33 surgery). The remainder were managed conservatively. 28 patients (5.1%) underwent colonic resection with cancer found in one specimen (3.6%). 287 patients underwent endoluminal follow-up with cancer diagnosed in 3 cases (1.0%). There was no significant difference in the prevalence of CRC between patients requiring emergency surgery and those managed conservatively, or between patients with complicated versus uncomplicated diverticulitis. CONCLUSION: CRC masquerading as acute diverticulitis is rare. The incidence of neoplasia both at endoscopic follow-up and in patients requiring emergency intervention is low. Conservative follow-up strategies appear safe, but their effectiveness in reducing the burden on endoscopy services may be limited by current age-based recommendations. Restricting follow-up to those with complicated AD would reduce the number of patients requiring endoluminal investigation by 70%.

Interventions to improve health and the determinants of health among sex workers in high-income countries: a systematic review.

Many sex worker populations face high morbidity and mortality, but data are scarce on interventions to improve their health. We did a systematic review of health and social interventions to improve the health and wider determinants of health among adult sex workers in high-income countries. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EthOS, OpenGrey, and Social Care Online, as well as the Global Network of Sex Work Projects and the Sex Work Research Hub for studies published between Jan 1, 2005 and Dec 16, 2021 (PROSPERO CRD42019158674). Quantitative studies reporting disaggregated data for sex workers were included and no comparators were specified. We assessed rigour using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. We summarised studies using vote counting and a narrative synthesis. 20 studies were included. Most reported findings exclusively for female sex workers (n=17) and street-based sex workers (n=11). Intervention components were divided into education and empowerment (n=14), drug treatment (n=4), sexual and reproductive health care (n=7), other health care (n=5), and welfare (n=5). Interventions affected a range of mental health, physical health, and health behaviour outcomes. Multicomponent interventions and interventions that were focused on education and empowerment were of benefit. Interventions that used peer design and peer delivery were effective. An outreach or drop-in component might be beneficial in some contexts. Sex workers who were new to working in an area faced greater challenges accessing services. Data were scarce for male, transgender, and indoor-based sex workers. Co-designed and co-delivered interventions that are either multicomponent or focus on education and empowerment are likely to be effective. Policy makers and health-care providers should improve access to services for all genders of sex workers and those new to an area. Future research should develop interventions for a greater diversity of sex worker populations and for wider health and social needs.

Barriers to management of opioid withdrawal in hospitals in England: a document analysis of hospital policies on the management of substance dependence.

BACKGROUND: People who use illicit opioids are more likely to be admitted to hospital than people of the same age in the general population. Many admissions end in discharge against medical advice, which is associated with readmission and all-cause mortality. Opioid withdrawal contributes to premature discharge. We sought to understand the barriers to timely provision of opioid substitution therapy (OST), which helps to prevent opioid withdrawal, in acute hospitals in England. METHODS: We requested policies on substance dependence management from 135 National Health Service trusts, which manage acute hospitals in England, and conducted a document content analysis. Additionally, we reviewed an Omitted and Delayed Medicines Tool (ODMT), one resource used to inform critical medicine categorisation in England. We worked closely with people with lived experience of OST and/or illicit opioid use, informed by principles of community-based participatory research. RESULTS: Eighty-six (64%) trusts provided 101 relevant policies. An additional 44 (33%) responded but could not provide relevant policies, and five (4%) did not send a definitive response. Policies illustrate procedural barriers to OST provision, including inconsistent application of national guidelines across trusts. Continuing community OST prescriptions for people admitted in the evening, night-time, or weekend was often precluded by requirements to confirm doses with organisations that were closed during these hours. 42/101 trusts (42%) required or recommended a urine drug test positive for OST medications or opioids prior to OST prescription. The language used in many policies was stigmatising and characterised people who use drugs as untrustworthy. OST was not specifically mentioned in the reviewed ODMT, with 'drugs used in substance dependence' collectively categorised as posing low risk if delayed and moderate risk if omitted. CONCLUSIONS: Many hospitals in England have policies that likely prevent timely and effective OST. This was underpinned by the 'low-risk' categorisation of OST delay in the ODMT. Delays to continuity of OST between community and hospital settings may contribute to inpatient opioid withdrawal and increase the risk of discharge against medical advice. Acute hospitals in England require standardised best practice policies that account for the needs of this patient group.

Role of community drug and alcohol services in physical healthcare for people who use illicit opioids: a qualitative study of clinical staff in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: To understand how clinicians working in addiction services perceive their responsibilities for physical healthcare of clients who use opioids, and how physical healthcare could be improved for this group. DESIGN: Qualitative study comprising semistructured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: 16 clinicians, including nurses and nurse practitioners, nurse consultants, addiction psychiatrists, specialist general practitioners and psychiatry specialty registrars. SETTING: Community-based drug and alcohol treatment services in the UK, with services including outpatient opioid agonist therapy. RESULTS: We identified three overarching themes. First, clients have unmet physical health needs that are often first identified in community drug and alcohol services. Participants reported attempts to improve their clients' access to healthcare by liaising directly with health services and undertaking other forms of health advocacy, but report limited success, with many referrals ending in non-attendance. Second, most participants saw their role as supporting access to mainstream health services rather than providing physical healthcare directly, though sometimes reported frustration at being unable to provide certain treatments such as antibiotics for a respiratory infection. A minority of participants felt that people who use illicit opioids would be best served by an integrated 'one-stop-shop' model, but felt this model is currently unlikely to receive funding. Third, participants felt isolated from other health services, in part due to commissioning arrangements in which funding is provided through local government rather than the National Health Service. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians participating in this study serve a patient group with unmet physical health needs, but lack the resources to respond effectively to these needs.