Adherence to guideline recommendations for Barrett's esophagus (BE) surveillance endoscopies: Effects of dedicated BE endoscopy lists.

Background and study aims For non-dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus (BE) patients, guidelines recommend endoscopic surveillance every 3 to 5 years with four-quadrant random biopsies every 2 cm of BE length. Adherence to these guidelines is low in clinical practice. Pooling BE surveillance endoscopies on dedicated endoscopy lists performed by dedicated endoscopists could possibly enhance guideline adherence, detection of visible lesions, and dysplasia detection rates (DDRs). Patients and methods Data were used from the ACID-study (Netherlands Trial Registry NL8214), a prospective trial of BE surveillance in the Netherlands. BE patients with known or previously treated dysplasia were excluded. Guideline adherence, detection of visible lesions, and DDRs were compared for patients on dedicated and general endoscopy lists. Results A total of 1,244 patients were included, 318 on dedicated lists and 926 on general lists. Endoscopies on dedicated lists showed significantly higher adherence to the random biopsy protocol (85% vs. 66%, P <0.01) and recommended surveillance intervals (60% vs. 47%, P <0.01) compared to general lists. Detection of visible lesions (8.8% vs. 8.1%, P =0.79) and DDRs were not significantly different (6.9% and 6.6%, P =0.94). None (0.0%) of the patients scheduled on dedicated lists and 10 (1.1%) on general lists were diagnosed with esophageal adenocarcinoma ( P =0.07). In multivariable analysis, dedicated lists were significantly associated with biopsy protocol adherence and adherence to surveillance interval recommendations with odds ratios of 4.45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.07-9.57) and 1.64 (95% CI 1.03-2.61), respectively. Conclusions Dedicated endoscopy lists are associated with better adherence to the random biopsy protocol and surveillance interval recommendations.

Effects of structured involvement of the primary care team versus standard care after a cancer diagnosis on patient satisfaction and healthcare use: the GRIP randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The growing number of cancer survivors and treatment possibilities call for more personalised and integrated cancer care. Primary care seems well positioned to support this. We aimed to assess the effects of structured follow-up of a primary care team after a cancer diagnosis. METHODS: We performed a multicentre randomised controlled trial enrolling patients curatively treated for breast, lung, colorectal, gynaecologic cancer or melanoma. In addition to usual cancer care in the control group, patients randomized to intervention were offered a "Time Out consultation" (TOC) with the general practitioner (GP) after diagnosis, and subsequent follow-up during and after treatment by a home care oncology nurse (HON). Primary outcomes were patient satisfaction with care (questionnaire: EORTC-INPATSAT-32) and healthcare utilisation. Intention-to-treat linear mixed regression analyses were used for satisfaction with care and other continuous outcome variables. The difference in healthcare utilisation for categorical data was calculated with a Pearson Chi-Square or a Fisher exact test and count data (none versus any) with a log-binomial regression. RESULTS: We included 154 patients (control n = 77, intervention n = 77) who were mostly female (75%), mainly diagnosed with breast cancer (51%), and had a mean age of 61 (SD ± 11.9) years. 81% of the intervention patients had a TOC and 68% had HON contact. Satisfaction with care was high (8 out of 10) in both study groups. At 3 months after treatment, GP satisfaction was significantly lower in the intervention group on 3 of 6 subscales, i.e., quality (- 14.2 (95%CI -27.0;-1.3)), availability (- 15,9 (- 29.1;-2.6)) and information provision (- 15.2 (- 29.1;-1.4)). Patients in the intervention group visited the GP practice and the emergency department more often ((RR 1.3 (1.0;1.7) and 1.70 (1.0;2.8)), respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the GRIP intervention, which was designed to involve the primary care team during and after cancer treatment, increased the number of primary healthcare contacts. However, it did not improve patient satisfaction with care and it increased emergency department visits. As the high uptake of the intervention suggests a need of patients, future research should focus on optimizing the design and implementation of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: GRIP is retrospectively (21/06/2016) registered in the 'Netherlands Trial Register' (NTR5909).

Adherence to surveillance guidelines for colorectal adenomatous polyps in the elderly.

OBJECTIVE: Determining adherence to recommended surveillance intervals after polypectomy in elderly patients. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study including 531 patients aged above 70 years undergoing polypectomy between 2009-2011 in a large Dutch teaching hospital, identified using the hospital's pathology registry. Outcomes of the index colonoscopy were reviewed. The interval until the next colonoscopy was assessed and compared both to the advised interval according to the Dutch guidelines and the gastroenterologist's recommendation. Reasons for deviating from the guideline were assessed. RESULTS: The initial recommendation of the gastroenterologist for the surveillance interval was in accordance to the guideline in 59.1% of the patients. In 21.8% the gastroenterologist's advice was not documented. In 15.8% of the patients the gastroenterologist recommended to perform surveillance endoscopy earlier than the guideline, mainly based on polyp characteristics. The gastroenterologist advised endoscopy when the guideline advised no surveillance at all in 1.0%, later than the guideline recommendation in 1.2%, or did not recommend surveillance when the guideline advised to continue in 1.0%. Actual surveillance intervals were in accordance to the guideline in 54.4% and in accordance to the initial advice of the gastroenterologist in 58.4% of the patients. CONCLUSION: Only in 41% of patients was the gastroenterologist's recommendation regarding surveillance after polypectomy either absent (21.8%) or not in accordance to the guideline (19.2%). Future research should focus on developing an evidence-based decision algorithm for elderly patients to support gastroenterologists and patients in the choices regarding cessation of surveillance at a certain level of frailty, comorbidity or remaining life-expectancy.

How the concept of biochemical response influenced the management of primary biliary cholangitis over time.

BACKGROUND: Criteria assessing biochemical response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) are established risk stratification tools in primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). We aimed to evaluate to what extent liver tests influenced patient management during a three decade period, and whether this changed over time. METHODS: 851 Dutch PBC patients diagnosed between 1988 and 2012 were reviewed to assess patient management in relation to liver test results during UDCA treatment. To do so, biochemical response at one year was analysed retrospectively according to Paris-1 criteria. RESULTS: Response was assessable for 687/851 (81%) patients; 157/687 non-responders. During a follow-up of 8.8 years (IQR 4.8-13.9), 141 died and 30 underwent liver transplantation. Transplant-free survival of non-responders (60%) was significantly worse compared with responders (87%) (p < 0.0001). Management was modified in 46/157 (29%) non-responders. The most frequent change observed, noted in 26/46 patients, was an increase in UDCA dosage. Subsequently, 9/26 (35%) non-responders became responders within the next two years. Steroid treatment was started in one patient; 19 patients were referred to a tertiary centre. No trend towards more frequent changes in management over time was observed (p = 0.10). CONCLUSION: Changes in medical management occurred in a minority of non-responders. This can largely be explained by the lack of accepted response criteria and of established second-line treatments for PBC. Nevertheless, the observation that response-guided management did not increase over time suggests that awareness of the concept of biochemical response requires further attention,particularly since new treatment options for PBC will soon become available.