RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Studies show variability in gastroenterologists' management of gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) in the United States. In 2020, the American Gastroenterological Association published GIM guidelines, recommending physician-patient shared decision-making on GIM surveillance based on risk factors. We compared gastroenterologists' communication trends of a GIM finding and surveillance recommendations before and after 2020 and evaluated patient and provider factors associated with a surveillance recommendation. METHODS: A sample of patients diagnosed with GIM on biopsies from upper endoscopies performed in 2018 (cohort A) and 2021 (cohort B) were included. Logistic regression analysis assessed the association between patient/provider characteristics and surveillance recommendations in the overall cohort and over time. MATERIALS: In all, 347 patients were included: 175 in cohort A and 172 in B. Median age was 65.7 (56.0, 73.4), and 54.5% were females. Communication to patients about GIM findings and surveillance recommendations increased from 24.6% <2020 to 50% >2020 (P<0.001) and 20% <2020 to 41.3% >2020 (P<0.001), respectively. Overall, endoscopy >2020, family history of gastric cancer, autoimmune gastritis, female providers, and gastroenterologists with 10 to 20 years of experience were associated with a surveillance recommendation. The effect of family history of gastric cancer and the effect of the patient's female sex on surveillance was significantly different between both cohorts [Odds ratio (OR): 0.13, 95% (Confidence interval) CI: 0.02, 0.97 and OR 3.39, 95% CI: 1.12, 10.2, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a 2-fold increase in surveillance recommendations after 2020, there was no meaningful effect of any of the patients' factors on a recommendation for surveillance over time, which raises the question as to whether surveillance is being offered to both average and high-risk patients without thorough risk stratification.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) is a precancerous condition. Limited data exist on real-world clinical practice relative to guidelines. AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate adherence to GIM risk stratification and identify factors associated with follow-up endoscopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted manual chart review of patients with histologically confirmed GIM at an urban, tertiary medical center were identified retrospectively and details of their demographics, Helicobacter pylori, biopsy protocol, endoscopic/histologic findings, and postendoscopy follow-up were recorded. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors independently associated with follow-up endoscopy. RESULTS: Among 253 patients, 59% were female, 37% non-Hispanic White (NHW), 26% Hispanic, 16% non-Hispanic Black (NHB). The median age at index endoscopy was 63.4 years (IQR: 55.9 to 70.0), with median follow-up of 65.1 months (IQR: 44.0 to 72.3). H. pylori was detected in 21.6% patients at index EGD. GIM extent and subtype data were frequently missing (22.9% and 32.8%, respectively). Based on available data, 26% had corpus-extended GIM and 28% had incomplete/mixed-type GIM. Compared with NHW, Hispanic patients had higher odds of follow-up EGD (OR=2.48, 95% CI: 1.23-5.01), while NHB patients had 59% lower odds of follow-up EGD (OR=0.41, 95% CI: 0.18-0.96). Corpus-extended GIM versus limited GIM (OR=2.27, 95% CI: 1.13-4.59) was associated with follow-up EGD, but GIM subtype and family history of gastric cancer were not. CONCLUSIONS: We observed suboptimal risk stratification among patients with GIM and notable race and ethnic disparities with respect to endoscopic surveillance. Targeted interventions are needed to improve practice patterns and mitigate observed disparities.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of telemedicine in improving healthcare access and reducing costs. This study aimed to assess order compliance in the virtual versus in-person setting for the initial evaluation of abdominal pain (AP) prior to and during the pandemic. METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of virtual and in-person outpatient gastroenterology visits for AP were identified through natural language processing from January 2019 through September 2021 at the Cleveland Clinic main campus and regional hospitals in Ohio. We assessed the number and type of orders placed for patients and measured compliance through order completion. This study received Institutional Review Board approval (IRB 21-514). RESULTS: Among 20,356 patients at their initial visit, 79% had orders placed, of which 40% had pandemic in-person visits, 13% had pandemic virtual visits, and 47% had pre-pandemic in-person visits. Patients seen virtually were 65.1% less likely to complete orders compared to patients seen in-person (p < 0.001) during the pandemic. Patients seen in a pandemic virtual setting were 71.0% less likely to complete imaging orders (p < 0.001), 82.6% less likely to complete procedure orders (p < 0.001), and 60.5% less likely to complete lab orders (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Compared with in-person visits, patients seen virtually for their first presentation of AP were less likely to complete labs, imaging, and endoscopic evaluations. In-person visits were more successful with patient order completion during the pandemic. These findings highlight that virtual visits for AP, despite convenience, may compromise care delivery and warrant additional care coordination to achieve compliance with medical recommendations.