Evaluation of the Prime Diet Quality Score from Early Childhood Through Mid-Adolescence.

BACKGROUND: Few diet quality indices have been developed and validated for use among children and adolescents. Additionally, many available indices require completion of burdensome dietary assessments. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to calculate and evaluate the performance of a modified version of the food-based Prime Diet Quality Score (PDQS) derived from different diet assessment methods conducted at 4 time points in a single study population from childhood through adolescence. METHODS: Among 1460 child participants in the Project Viva cohort, we calculated the PDQS in early and mid-childhood and early and mid-adolescence using dietary data obtained from food frequency questionnaire (early childhood: parent report), PrimeScreen (mid-childhood: parent report; early adolescence: self-report) and 24-h recall (mid-adolescence: self-report). We evaluated construct and relative validity and internal reliability of the score in each life stage. RESULTS: The PDQS showed a range of scores at all life stages and higher scores were associated with intake of many health-promoting macronutrients and micronutrients (e.g., protein, fiber, and vitamins) in early childhood and mid-adolescence. The PDQS performed similarly to the Youth Healthy Eating Index/Healthy Eating Index (Spearman r = 0.63-0.85) in various assessments. Higher PDQS was associated with expected characteristics including more frequent breakfast eating, family dinners, and vigorous physical activity; with less frequent TV viewing and fast food intake; and with more sleep and higher maternal diet scores during pregnancy. Cross-sectional associations of the PDQS with various anthropometric measurements and biomarkers were inconsistent but generally in the expected directions (e.g., higher PDQS associated with lower triglycerides and insulin and higher HDL cholesterol). Internal reliability was consistent with what has been found for other diet quality indices. CONCLUSIONS: The PDQS can be calculated from data collected using different and brief dietary assessment methods and appears to be a valid and useful measure of overall diet quality in children and adolescents. Project Viva was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02820402.

Pediatric endoscopy: how can we improve patient outcomes and ensure best practices?

INTRODUCTION: Strategies to promote high-quality endoscopy in children require consensus around pediatric-specific quality standards and indicators. Using a rigorous guideline development process, the international Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) was developed to support continuous quality improvement efforts within and across pediatric endoscopy services. AREAS COVERED: This review presents a framework, informed by the PEnQuIN guidelines, for assessing endoscopist competence, granting procedural privileges, audit and feedback, and for skill remediation, when required. As is critical for promoting quality, PEnQuIN indicators can be benchmarked at the individual endoscopist, endoscopy facility, and endoscopy community levels. Furthermore, efforts to incorporate technologies, including electronic medical records and artificial intelligence, into endoscopic quality improvement processes can aid in creation of large-scale networks to facilitate comparison and standardization of quality indicator reporting across sites. EXPERT OPINION: PEnQuIN quality standards and indicators provide a framework for continuous quality improvement in pediatric endoscopy, benefiting individual endoscopists, endoscopy facilities, and the broader endoscopy community. Routine and reliable measurement of data, facilitated by technology, is required to identify and drive improvements in care. Engaging all stakeholders in endoscopy quality improvement processes is crucial to enhancing patient outcomes and establishing best practices for safe, efficient, and effective pediatric endoscopic care.

The 2022 top 10 list of endoscopy topics in medical publishing: an annual review by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Editorial Board.

Using a systematic literature search of original articles published during 2022 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and other high-impact medical and gastroenterology journals, the 10-member Editorial Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy composed a list of the 10 most significant topic areas in GI endoscopy during the study year. Each Editorial Board member was directed to consider 3 criteria in generating candidate lists-significance, novelty, and global impact on clinical practice-and subject matter consensus was facilitated by the Chair through electronic voting. The 10 identified areas collectively represent advances in the following endoscopic spheres: artificial intelligence, endoscopic submucosal dissection, Barrett's esophagus, interventional EUS, endoscopic resection techniques, pancreaticobiliary endoscopy, management of acute pancreatitis, endoscopic environmental sustainability, the NordICC trial, and spiral enteroscopy. Each board member was assigned a consensus topic area around which to summarize relevant important articles, thereby generating this précis of the "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2022.

Promoting Research that Supports High-Quality Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Children.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Defining and measuring the quality of endoscopic care is a key component of performing gastrointestinal endoscopy in children. The purpose of this review is to discuss quality metrics for pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy and identify where additional research is needed. RECENT FINDINGS: Pediatric-specific standards and indicators were recently defined by the international Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) working group through a rigorous guideline consensus process. Although the aim of these guidelines is to facilitate best practices for safe and high-quality gastrointestinal endoscopy in children, they highlight the pressing need to expand upon the body of evidence supporting these standards and indicators as predictors of clinically relevant outcomes. In this review, we propose and discuss ideas for several high-yield research topics to engage pediatric endoscopists and promote best practices in pediatric endoscopy.

The Evolution of Sedation for Pediatric Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.

Sedation for pediatric endoscopy has evolved from an endoscopist-administered component of procedures to an almost entirely anesthesiologist-supported endeavor. Nevertheless, there are no ideal endoscopist or anesthesiologist-administered sedation protocols, and wide practice variation exists in both models. Furthermore, sedation for pediatric endoscopy, whether administered by endoscopists or anesthesiologists, remains the highest risk to patient safety. This underscores the importance of both specialties identifying best sedation practices together that can safeguard patients while maximizing procedural efficiency and minimizing costs. In this review, the authors discuss specific levels of sedation for endoscopy and the risks and benefits of various regimens.

Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) quality standards and indicators for pediatric endoscopy: an ASGE-endorsed guideline.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Current endoscopy quality guidelines largely focus on cancer screening-related metrics that are not applicable to pediatric populations. Through an international Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN), quality standards and indicators for pediatric endoscopic procedures were developed and endorsed by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE). METHODS: The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II instrument guided PEnQuIN members, from 31 centers representing 11 countries, in generating and refining proposed quality standards and indicators. Quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Consensus on reporting elements was sought with an iterative online Delphi process. RESULTS: Forty-nine quality standards and 47 indicators, encompassing pediatric endoscopy facilities, procedures, and endoscopists, as well as 30 reporting elements essential for inclusion within a pediatric endoscopy report reached consensus. Minimal acceptable standards were defined for 3 key indicators related to pediatric lower endoscopy: terminal ileal intubation rate ≥85%, cecal intubation rate ≥90%, and rate of adequate bowel preparation ≥80%. There was strong consensus that terminal ileal intubation, rather than cecal intubation, is integral to ensuring high-quality endoscopic care in children. CONCLUSIONS: The PEnQuIN guidelines establish international agreement on clinically meaningful metrics tailored to pediatric endoscopy that can be used to promote safe, high-quality, patient- and family-centered endoscopic care. Moving forward, it is recommended that all providers and facilities involved in endoscopy service for children adopt the PEnQuIN standards, indicators, and key reporting elements outlined in these ASGE-endorsed guidelines.

GIE Editorial Board Top 10: advances in GI endoscopy in 2021.

The 9-member Editorial Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy performed a systematic literature search of original articles published during 2021 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and 10 other high-impact medical and gastroenterology journals on endoscopy-related topics. Votes from each editorial board member were tallied to identify a consensus list of the 10 most significant topic areas in GI endoscopy over the calendar year of study, with a focus on 3 criteria: significance, novelty, and global impact on clinical practice. The 10 areas identified collectively represent advances in the following endoscopic topics: colonoscopy optimization, bariatric endoscopy, endoscopic needle sampling and drainage, peroral endoscopic myotomy, endoscopic defect closure, meeting systemic challenges in endoscopic training and practice, endohepatology, FNA versus fine-needle biopsy sampling, endoscopic mucosal and submucosal procedures, and cold snare polypectomy. Each board member contributed a summary of important articles relevant to 1 to 2 of the consensus topic areas, leading to a collective summary that is presented in this document of the "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2021.

Timing of Cow's Milk Protein Introduction and Childhood Adverse Reactions to Cow's Milk.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines emphasize early introduction to potentially allergenic foods, but the optimal timing, amount, and exposure routes for foods other than peanut are not well-established. Cow's milk is often the first allergenic food introduced through infant formulas. OBJECTIVE: To examine timing of cow's milk protein introduction (CMPI), including interaction with formula supplementation after delivery, in relation to reported cow's milk adverse reactions throughout childhood. METHODS: Among children in the Boston, Mass-area Project Viva cohort, we assessed timing of CMPI (<2 weeks, 2 weeks-<6 months, ≥6 months) with questionnaires administered in infancy. Outcomes were (1) parent-reported cow's milk adverse reactions via annual questionnaires from age 2 to 13 years (n = 1298) and (2) milk sensitization (n = 505) and IgE-mediated milk allergy (n = 491) at age approximately 8 years. We used multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for parental atopy history, delivery mode, gestational age at delivery, child race, and census tract median household income, and investigated effect modification by ever/never breast-fed status and formula supplementation in the delivery hospital. RESULTS: A total of 32% were introduced to cow's milk protein at age less than 2 weeks, 38% at age 2 weeks to less than 6 months, and 30% at age 6 months or more. Compared with children with CMPI at age less than 2 weeks, children with CMPI at age 6 months or more had a higher risk of cow's milk adverse reaction at age 2 to 5 years (odds ratio, 2.4 [1.2-4.7]). Children given formula after delivery + CMPI at age less than 2 weeks had the lowest risk overall. Among children not given formula after delivery, CMPI at age 2 weeks to 6 months appeared most protective. Results were similar among ever-breast-fed children. Timing of CMPI was not associated with milk sensitization or IgE-mediated milk allergy in mid-childhood. CONCLUSIONS: Early, consistent cow's milk exposure appears protective against adverse reactions to cow's milk.

Association of cow's milk intake in early childhood with adiposity and cardiometabolic risk in early adolescence.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have provided conflicting evidence regarding associations of pediatric milk consumption with subsequent adiposity. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to estimate associations of the consumption frequency and fat content of early childhood milk intake with early adolescent adiposity and cardiometabolic risk. METHODS: We analyzed data collected prospectively from 796 children in Project Viva, a Boston-area prebirth cohort. Parents reported the frequency (times/day) and fat content [higher-fat: whole (3.25%) or 2% milk; lower-fat: 1% or skim milk] of cow's milk consumed in early childhood (mean, 3.2 years) via food-frequency questionnaires. We measured adiposity and cardiometabolic markers in early adolescence (mean, 13.2 years) and conducted multivariable regressions to assess associations adjusted for baseline parental and child sociodemographic, anthropometric, and dietary factors. RESULTS: In early childhood, mean milk intake was 2.3 times/day (SD, 1.2 times/day), and 63% of children drank primarily higher-fat milk. The early childhood BMI z-score (BMIz) was inversely associated with the fat content of milk consumed in early childhood. After adjustment for baseline parent and child factors, early childhood intake of higher-fat compared with lower-fat milk was associated with lower adiposity; however, the 95% CIs for most adiposity outcomes-except for the odds of overweight or obesity (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.93)-crossed the null after adjustment for the baseline child BMIz and BMIz change between ages 2 and 3 years. Early childhood consumption of higher-fat milk (compared with lower-fat milk) was not associated with adverse cardiometabolic outcomes. The frequency of cow's milk consumption in early childhood was not associated with adiposity or cardiometabolic risk in early adolescence. CONCLUSIONS: Consumption of higher-fat cow's milk in early childhood was not associated with increased adiposity or adverse cardiometabolic health over a decade later. Our findings do not support current recommendations to consume lower-fat milk to reduce the risk of later obesity and adverse cardiometabolic outcomes. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02820402.

Overview of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Quality Standards and Indicators for Pediatric Endoscopy: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline.

INTRODUCTION: Pediatric-specific quality standards for endoscopy are needed to define best practices, while measurement of associated indicators is critical to guide quality improvement. The international Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) working group was assembled to develop and define quality standards and indicators for pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures through a rigorous guideline consensus process. METHODS: The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument guided PEnQuIN members, recruited from 31 centers of various practice types representing 11 countries, in generating and refining proposed quality standards and indicators. Consensus was sought via an iterative online Delphi process, and finalized at an in-person conference. Quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. RESULTS: Forty-nine quality standards and 47 indicators reached consensus, encompassing pediatric endoscopy facilities, procedures, endoscopists, and the patient experience. The evidence base for PEnQuIN standards and indicators was largely adult-based and observational, and downgraded for indirectness, imprecision, and study limitations to "very low" quality, resulting in "conditional" recommendations for most standards (45/49). CONCLUSIONS: The PEnQuIN guideline development process establishes international agreement on clinically meaningful metrics that can be used to promote safety and quality in endoscopic care for children. Through PEnQuIN, pediatric endoscopists and endoscopy services now have a framework for auditing, providing feedback, and ultimately, benchmarking performance. Expansion of evidence and prospective validation of PEnQuIN standards and indicators as predictors of clinically relevant outcomes and high-quality pediatric endoscopic care is now a research priority.

Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Quality Standards and Indicators for Pediatric Endoscopy Facilities: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline.

INTRODUCTION: There is increasing international recognition of the impact of variability in endoscopy facilities on procedural quality and outcomes. There is also growing precedent for assessing the quality of endoscopy facilities at regional and national levels by using standardized rating scales to identify opportunities for improvement. METHODS: With support from the North American and European Societies of Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN), an international working group of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) used the methodological strategy of the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument to develop standards and indicators relevant for assessing the quality of facilities where endoscopic care is provided to children. Consensus was reached via an iterative online Delphi process and subsequent in-person meeting. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. RESULTS: The PEnQuIN working group achieved consensus on 27 standards for facilities supporting pediatric endoscopy, as well 10 indicators that can be used to identify high-quality endoscopic care in children. These standards were subcategorized into three subdomains: Quality of Clinical Operations (15 standards, 5 indicators); Patient and Caregiver Experience (9 standards, 5 indicators); and Workforce (3 standards). DISCUSSION: The rigorous PEnQuIN process successfully yielded standards and indicators that can be used to universally guide and measure high-quality facilities for procedures around the world where endoscopy is performed in children. It also underscores the current paucity of evidence for pediatric endoscopic care processes, and the need for research into this clinical area.

Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Quality Standards and Indicators for Pediatric Endoscopic Procedures: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline.

INTRODUCTION: High-quality pediatric gastrointestinal procedures are performed when clinically indicated and defined by their successful performance by skilled providers in a safe, comfortable, child-oriented, and expeditious manner. The process of pediatric endoscopy begins when a plan to perform the procedure is first made and ends when all appropriate patient follow-up has occurred. Procedure-related standards and indicators developed to date for endoscopy in adults emphasize cancer screening and are thus unsuitable for pediatric medicine. METHODS: With support from the North American and European Societies of Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN), an international working group of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) used the methodological strategy of the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument to develop standards and indicators relevant for assessing the quality of endoscopic procedures. Consensus was sought via an iterative online Delphi process and finalized at an in-person conference. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. RESULTS: The PEnQuIN working group achieved consensus on 14 standards for pediatric endoscopic procedures, as well as 30 indicators that can be used to identify high-quality procedures. These were subcategorized into three subdomains: Preprocedural (3 standards, 7 indicators), Intraprocedural (8 standards, 18 indicators), and Postprocedural (3 standards, 5 indicators). A minimum target for the key indicator, "rate of adequate bowel preparation," was set at ≥80%. DISCUSSION: It is recommended that all facilities and individual providers performing pediatric endoscopy worldwide initiate and engage with the procedure-related standards and indicators developed by PEnQuIN to identify gaps in quality and drive improvement.

Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Quality Standards and Indicators for Pediatric Endoscopists and Endoscopists in Training: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline.

INTRODUCTION: High-quality pediatric endoscopy requires reliable performance of procedures by competent individual providers who consistently uphold all standards determined to assure optimal patient outcomes. Establishing consensus expectations for ongoing monitoring and assessment of individual pediatric endoscopists is a method for confirming the highest possible quality of care for such procedures worldwide. We aim to provide guidance to define and measure quality of endoscopic care for children. METHODS: With support from the North American and European Societies of Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN), an international working group of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) used the methodological strategy of the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument to develop standards and indicators relevant for assessing the quality of endoscopists. Consensus was sought via an iterative online Delphi process and finalized at an in-person conference. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. RESULTS: The PEnQuIN working group achieved consensus on 6 standards that all providers who perform pediatric endoscopy should uphold and 2 standards for pediatric endoscopists in training, with 7 corresponding indicators that can be used to identify high-quality endoscopists. Additionally, these can inform continuous quality improvement at the provider level. Minimum targets for defining high-quality pediatric ileocolonoscopy were set for 2 key indicators: cecal intubation rate (≥90%) and terminal ileal intubation rate (≥85%). DISCUSSION: It is recommended that all individual providers performing or training to perform pediatric endoscopy initiate and engage with these international endoscopist-related standards and indicators developed by PEnQuIN.

Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Pediatric Endoscopy Reporting Elements: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline.

INTRODUCTION: High-quality procedure reports are a cornerstone of high-quality pediatric endoscopy as they ensure the clear communication of procedural events and outcomes, guide patient care and facilitate continuous quality improvement. The aim of this document is to outline standardized reporting elements that achieved international consensus as requirements for high-quality pediatric endoscopy procedure reports. METHODS: With support from the North American and European Societies of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN), an international working group of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) used Delphi methodology to identify key elements that should be found in all pediatric endoscopy reports. Item reduction was attained through iterative rounds of anonymized online voting using a 6-point scale. Responses were analyzed after each round and items were excluded from subsequent rounds if ≤50% of panelists rated them as 5 ("agree moderately") or 6 ("agree strongly"). Reporting elements that ≥70% of panelists rated as "agree moderately" or "agree strongly" were considered to have achieved consensus. RESULTS: Twenty-six PEnQuIN group members from 25 centers internationally rated 63 potential reporting elements that were generated from a systematic literature review and the Delphi panelists. The response rates were 100% for all three survey rounds. Thirty reporting elements reached consensus as essential for inclusion within a pediatric endoscopy report. DISCUSSION: It is recommended that the PEnQuIN Reporting Elements for pediatric endoscopy be universally employed across all endoscopists, procedures and facilities as a foundational means of ensuring high-quality endoscopy services, while facilitating quality improvement activities in pediatric endoscopy.

Variation in Pediatric Anesthesiologist Sedation Practices for Pediatric Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.

Background: Despite a worldwide shift toward anesthesiologist-administered sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy in children, ideal sedation regimens remain unclear and best practices undefined. Aim: The aim of our study was to document variation in anesthesiologist-administered sedation for pediatric endoscopy. Outcomes of interest included coefficients of variation, procedural efficiency, as well as adverse events. Methods: IRB approval was obtained to review electronic health records of children undergoing routine endoscopy at our medical center during a recent calendar year. Descriptive and multivariate analyses were used to examine predictors of sedation practices. Results: 258 healthy children [2-21 years (median 15, (Q1-Q3 = 10-17)] underwent either upper and/or lower endoscopies with sedation administered by anesthesiologists (n = 21), using different sedation regimens (29) that ranged from a single drug administered to 6 sedatives in combination. Most patients did not undergo endotracheal tube intubation for the procedure (208, 81%), and received propofol (255, 89%) either alone or in combination with other sedatives. A total of 10 (3.8%) adverse events (9 sedation related) were documented to occur. The coefficient of variation (CV) for sedation times was high at 64.2%, with regression analysis suggesting 8% was unexplained by procedure time. Multivariable model suggested that longer procedure time (p < 0.0001), younger age (p < 0.0001), and use of endotracheal tube intubation (p = 0.02) were associated with longer sedation time. Discussion: We found great variation in anesthesiologist administered regimens for pediatric endoscopy at our institution that may be unwarranted, presenting may opportunities for minimizing patient risk, as well as for optimizing procedural efficiency.

GIE Editorial Board top 10 topics: advances in GI endoscopy in 2020.

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy's Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Editorial Board reviewed a systematic literature search of original endoscopy-related articles published during 2020 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and 10 other high-impact medical and gastroenterology journals. Votes from each individual board member were tallied to identify a consensus list of the 10 most significant topic areas in GI endoscopy over the calendar year of study using 4 criteria: significance, novelty, impact on national health, and impact on global health. The 10 areas identified were as follows: artificial intelligence in endoscopy, coronavirus disease 2019 and GI practice, third-space endoscopy, lumen-apposing metal stents, single-use duodenoscopes and other disposable equipment, endosonographic needle technology and techniques, endoscopic closure devices, advances in GI bleeding management, improvements in polypectomy techniques, and bariatric endoscopy. Each board member contributed a summary of important articles relevant to 1 to 2 topic areas, leading to a collective summary that is presented in this document of the "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2020.

Physician Perspectives about Telemedicine: Considering the Usability of Telemedicine in Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVE: Use of telemedicine in pediatric gastroenterology has increased dramatically in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The goal of this study was to systematically assess the usability of telemedicine in the field of pediatric gastroenterology. METHODS: The previously validated Telehealth Usability Questionnaire was distributed to physician pediatric gastroenterologist members of North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition. Physician demographic and practice characteristics were collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive, linear mixed-effect, and ordinary least squares regression methods. RESULTS: One hundred sixty pediatric gastroenterologists completed the survey. The majority were from academic practice (77%) with experience ranging from trainee (11%) to over 20 years of clinical practice (34%). Most (82%) had no experience with telemedicine before the pandemic. The average usability score (scale 1-5) was 3.87 (σ = 0.67) with the highest domain in the usefulness of telemedicine (µâ€Š= 4.29, σ = 0.69) and physician satisfaction (µâ€Š= 4.13, σ = 0.79) and the lowest domain in reliability (µâ€Š= 3.02, σ = 0.87). When comparing trainees to attending physicians, trainees' responses were almost one point lower on satisfaction with telemedicine (trainee effect = -0.97, Bonferroni adjusted 95% confidence interval = -1.71 to -0.23). CONCLUSION: Pediatric gastroenterologists who responded to the survey reported that the technology for telemedicine was usable, but trainees indicated lower levels of satisfaction when compared to attending physicians. Future study is needed to better understand user needs and the impacts of telemedicine on providers with different levels are experience to inform efforts to promote implementation and use of telemedicine beyond the pandemic.