Point-of-care hepatitis C screening with direct access referral to improve linkage to care among halfway house residents: a pilot randomised study.

INTRODUCTION: Linkage to care among individuals with substance misuse remains a barrier to the elimination of the hepatitis C virus (HCV). We aimed to determine whether point-of-care (PoC) education, screening and staging for liver disease with direct access to hospitals would improve linkage to care among this group. METHODS: All participants were offered PoC education and HCV screening. HCV-positive participants were randomised to standard care (controls) or direct access, which provided a direct pathway to hospitals. Linkage to care was determined by reviewing electronic medical records. Linkage of care cascade was defined as attendance at the specialist clinic, confirmation of viraemia by HCV RNA testing, discussion about HCV treatment and initiation of treatment. RESULTS: 351 halfway house residents were screened. The overall HCV prevalence was 30.5% (n = 107), with 69 residents in the control group and 38 in the direct access group. The direct access group had a significantly higher percentage of cases linked to specialist review for confirmatory RNA testing (63.2% vs. 40.6%, p = 0.025), HCV treatment discussion (p = 0.009) and treatment initiation (p = 0.01) compared to the controls. Overall, only 12.6% (n = 13) had treatment initiation during follow-up. PoC HCV screening with direct access referral had significantly higher linkage to HCV treatment initiation (adjusted odds ratio 9.13, p = 0.005) in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: PoC HCV screening with direct access improves linkage to care and simplifies the HCV care cascade, leading to improved treatment uptake. PoC education, screening, diagnosis and treatment may be an effective strategy to achieving HCV micro-elimination in this population.

Efficiency of performing pulmonary procedures in a shared endoscopy unit: procedure time, turnaround time, delays, and procedure waiting time.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficiency of performing pulmonary procedures in the endoscopy unit in a large teaching hospital. METHODS: A prospective study from May 20 to July 19, 2013, was designed. The main outcome measures were procedure delays and their reasons, duration of procedural steps starting from patient's arrival to endoscopy unit, turnaround time, total case durations, and procedure wait time. RESULTS: A total of 65 procedures were observed. The most common procedure was BAL (61%) followed by TBLB (31%). Overall procedures for 35 (53.8%) of 65 patients were delayed by ≥ 30 minutes, 21/35 (60%) because of "spillover" of the gastrointestinal and surgical cases into the time block of pulmonary procedure. Time elapsed between end of pulmonary procedure and start of the next procedure was ≥ 30 minutes in 8/51 (16%) of cases. In 18/51 (35%) patients there was no next case in the room after completion of the pulmonary procedure. The average idle time of the room after the end of pulmonary procedure and start of next case or end of shift at 5:00 PM if no next case was 58 ± 53 minutes. In 17/51 (33%) patients the room's idle time was >60 minutes. A total of 52.3% of patients had the wait time >2 days and 11% had it ≥ 6 days, reason in 15/21 (71%) being unavailability of the slot. CONCLUSIONS: Most pulmonary procedures were delayed due to spillover of the gastrointestinal and surgical cases into the block time allocated to pulmonary procedures. The most common reason for difficulty encountered in scheduling the pulmonary procedure was slot unavailability. This caused increased procedure waiting time. The strategies to reduce procedure delays and turnaround times, along with improved scheduling methods, may have a favorable impact on the volume of procedures performed in the unit thereby optimizing the existing resources.