British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Over 2.5 million gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures are carried out in the United Kingdom (UK) every year. Procedures are carried out with local anaesthetic r with sedation. Sedation is commonly used for gastrointestinal endoscopy, but the type and amount of sedation administered is influenced by the complexity and nature of the procedure and patient factors. The elective and emergency nature of endoscopy procedures and local resources also have a significant impact on the delivery of sedation. In the UK, the vast majority of sedated procedures are carried out using benzodiazepines, with or without opiates, whereas deeper sedation using propofol or general anaesthetic requires the involvement of an anaesthetic team. Patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy need to have good understanding of the options for sedation, including the option for no sedation and alternatives, balancing the intended aims of the procedure and reducing the risk of complications. These guidelines were commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Endoscopy Committee with input from major stakeholders, to provide a detailed update, incorporating recent advances in sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy.This guideline covers aspects from pre-assessment of the elective 'well' patient to patients with significant comorbidity requiring emergency procedures. Types of sedation are discussed, procedure and room requirements and the recovery period, providing guidance to enhance safety and minimise complications. These guidelines are intended to inform practising clinicians and all staff involved in the delivery of gastrointestinal endoscopy with an expectation that this guideline will be revised in 5-years' time.

Patient safety incidents in endoscopy: a human factors analysis of nonprocedural significant harm incidents from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS).

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in understanding and reducing the risk of endoscopic procedures, there is little consideration of the safety of the wider endoscopy service. Patient safety incidents (PSIs) still occur. We sought to identify nonprocedural PSIs (nPSIs) and their causative factors from a human factors perspective and generate ideas for safety improvement. METHODS: Endoscopy-specific PSI reports were extracted from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS). A retrospective, cross-sectional human factors analysis of data was performed. Two independent researchers coded data using a hybrid thematic analysis approach. The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) was used to code contributory factors. Analysis informed creation of driver diagrams and key recommendations for safety improvement in endoscopy. RESULTS: From 2017 to 2019, 1181 endoscopy-specific PSIs of significant harm were reported across England and Wales, with 539 (45.6%) being nPSIs. Five categories accounted for over 80% of all incidents, with "follow-up and surveillance" being the largest (23.4% of all nPSIs). From the free-text incident reports, 487 human factors codes were identified. Decision-based errors were the most common act prior to PSI occurrence. Other frequent preconditions to incidents were focused on environmental factors, particularly overwhelmed resources, patient factors, and ineffective team communication. Lack of staffing, standard operating procedures, effective systems, and clinical pathways were also contributory. Seven key recommendations for improving safety have been made in response to our findings. CONCLUSIONS: This was the first national-level human factors analysis of endoscopy-specific PSIs. This work will inform safety improvement strategies and should empower individual services to review their approach to safety.

Development of the "Teamwork in Endoscopy Assessment Module for Endoscopic Non-Technical Skills" (TEAM-ENTS) behavioral marker system.

BACKGROUND: Non-technical skills (NTS) are integral to team performance and subsequent quality and safety of care. Behavioral marker systems (BMSs) are now increasingly used in healthcare to support the training and assessment of team NTS. Within gastrointestinal endoscopy, this is an area of novel research. The aims of this study were to define the core relevant NTS for endoscopy teams and develop a preliminary framework for a team-based BMS known as TEAM-ENTS (Teamwork in Endoscopy Assessment Module for Endoscopic Non-Technical Skills). METHODS: This study was conducted in two phases. In phase 1, a literature review of team-based BMSs was performed to inform an interview study of core endoscopy team members. Cognitive task analysis was used to break down the NTS relevant to endoscopy teams. Framework analysis generated the structure for the preliminary TEAM-ENTS framework. In phase 2, a modified Delphi process was undertaken to refine the items of the framework. RESULTS: Seven consultant endoscopists and six nurses were interviewed. The final coding framework consisted of 88 codes grouped into five overarching categories. In total, 58 participants were recruited to the Delphi panel. In the first round, nine elements and 37 behavioral descriptors did not meet consensus. Following item adjustment, merging and deletion, all remaining items met consensus thresholds after the second round. The refined TEAM-ENTS BMS consists of five categories, 16 elements, and 47 behavioral descriptors. CONCLUSIONS: The refined TEAM-ENTS behavioral marker system was developed to reflect the core NTS relevant to endoscopy teams. Future studies will aim to fully validate this tool.

National census of UK endoscopy services 2021.

Introduction: The Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal (GI) Endoscopy (JAG) biennial census provides a unique view of UK endoscopy. The 2021 census was conducted to understand the impact of ongoing pressures, highlighted in the previous census, as well as COVID-19. Methods: The census was sent to all JAG-registered services in April 2021. Data were analysed across the domains of activity, waiting time targets, workforce, COVID-19, safety, GI bleeding, anaesthetic support, equipment and decontamination. Statistical methods were used to determine associations between domain-specific outcome variables and core demographic data. Results: 321 services completed the census (79.2% response rate). In the first 3 months of 2021, 57.9% of NHS services met urgent cancer waits, 17.9% met routine waits and 13.4% met surveillance waits. Workforce redeployment was the predominant reason cited for not meeting targets. There were significant regional differences in the proportion of patients waiting 6 or more weeks (p=0.001). During the pandemic, 64.8% of NHS services had staff redeployed and there was a mean sickness rate of 8.5%. Services were, on average, at 79.3% activity compared with 2 years ago. JAG-accredited services are more likely to meet urgent cancer waits, with a lower proportion of patient waiting 6 weeks or more (p=0.03). Over 10% of services stated that equipment shortage interfered with service delivery. Conclusions: Services are adapting to continued pressure and there are signs of a focused response to demand at a time of ongoing uncertainty. This census' findings will inform ongoing guidance from JAG and relevant stakeholders.

National census of UK endoscopy services in 2019.

INTRODUCTION: The 2017 Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal (GI) Endoscopy (JAG) census highlighted the pressure endoscopy services were under in meeting national targets and the factors behind this. In 2019, JAG conducted a further national census of endoscopy services to understand trends in activity, workforce and waiting time targets. METHODS: In April 2019, the census was sent to all eligible JAG-registered services. Collated data were analysed through various statistical methods. A further comparative dataset was created using available submissions from the 2017 census matched to services in the current census. RESULTS: There was a 68% response rate (322/471). There has been a 12%-15% increase in activity across all GI procedures with largest increases in bowel cancer screening. Fewer services are meeting waiting time targets compared with 2017, with endoscopist, nursing and physical capacity cited as the main reasons. Services are striving to improve capacity: 80% of services have an agreed business plan to meet capacity and the number using insourcing has increased from 13% to 20%. The workforce has increased, with endoscopist numbers increasing by 15%, nurses and allied health professionals by 14% and clerical staff by 30%. CONCLUSIONS: The 2019 JAG census is the most recent and extensive survey of UK endoscopy services. There is a clear trend of increasing activity with fewer services able to meet national waiting time targets than 2 years ago. Services have increased their workforce and improved planning to stem the tide but there remains a continued pressure to deliver high quality, safe endoscopy. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, JAG recognises that these pressures will be severely exacerbated and waiting time targets for accreditation will need adjustment and tolerance during the evolution and recovery from the pandemic.

JAG/BSG national survey of UK endoscopy services: impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and early restoration of endoscopy services.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected UK endoscopy workload. The Joint Advisory Group on GI endoscopy and British Society of Gastroenterology issued guidelines on endoscopy service delivery changes and restoration. We surveyed UK endoscopy clinical leads to gain insights into service restoration. METHODS: A Google Forms-designed survey, assessing endoscopy provision, Covid minimisation and referral pathways was circulated to all UK endoscopy leads. The survey was open between 19 and 24 May 2020. RESULTS: 97 endoscopy leads completed the survey, with all UK nations and regions represented. Analysis showed 20% of endoscopy services were not providing endoscopy. Workload limitations were due to enforced interprocedural downtime (92%; with some services enforcing >1-hour downtime between procedures), social distancing (88%) and working in personal protective equipment (PPE) (87%). 91% of services reported a referral backlog (urgent median 2 months, routine median 6 months). 96% of services reported no current problems accessing PPE. Level 1/2 PPE use in colonoscopy was not uniform. 63% of services routinely swab patients for COVID-19 before endoscopy, 88% of services do not routinely swab asymptomatic staff. Comments addressed reducing endoscopy demand through vetting and changing referral criteria, the mostly commonly cited strategy being increased faecal immunochemical testing in symptomatic patients (70% of services). CONCLUSION: This survey demonstrates the pandemic's profound impact on UK endoscopy. Challenges include standardising Covid-minimisation strategies and recovering staffing levels. To improve endoscopy services, there is a need to refine referral pathways, improve vetting and clarify guidance on downtime and PPE within endoscopy.

A new in vitro model of venous hypertension: the effect of pressure on dermal fibroblasts.

PURPOSE: Venous hypertension leads to venous stasis ulcers. White cell activation, protein leakage from pressurized capillaries, and cytokine imbalances have all been implicated as indirect effects of venous hypertension that contribute to dermal changes seen in chronic venous insufficiency. The direct effect of increased tissue pressures on dermal elements has not been investigated. Prior studies have shown that fibroblasts isolated from venous ulcers have altered growth rates, morphologies, and protein production similar to senescent or aged fibroblasts. We hypothesize that neonatal fibroblasts (NNFs) cultured in conditions of increased atmospheric pressure will demonstrate altered cell function when compared with those grown at normal atmospheric pressure (ATM). METHODS: A pressure incubator was used to culture populations of NNFs at ATM, 60 mm Hg over ATM (ATM + 60 mm Hg), and 120 mm Hg over ATM (ATM + 120 mm Hg). NNF population growth rates were determined by periodic flow cytometry analysis over a 2-week period. Light microscopy and digital imaging were used to evaluate cell morphology. Senescence-associated B-galactosidase (SA-beta-Gal) activity was determined using the X-Gal stain. Fibronectin production was assessed by exposing cells sequentially to anti-fibronectin antibodies and Oregon Green-conjugated goat anti-mouse secondary antibodies. Flow cytometry then was used to determine relative proportions of cells staining positively for fibronectin. Statistical analysis was accomplished with analysis of variance. RESULTS: Populations of cells grown under increased pressures (both ATM + 60 and ATM + 120) showed reduced growth rates (P <.001). Similarly, morphologies of cells grown under pressure had increased cytoplasm to nuclear ratios with abnormal nuclear shapes. Populations of cells grown under pressure had higher percentages of cells staining positive for fibronectin (ATM = 45%, ATM + 60 = 59%, ATM + 120 = 79%). After 14 days of growth under pressure, fibroblast populations did not demonstrate augmented productions of the senescence marker SA-beta-Gal (ATM =.5%, ATM + 60 =.25%, ATM + 120 =.75%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that NNFs grown in culture under increased pressures undergo a transformation not seen in cells grown at atmospheric pressure. Cells grown under pressure demonstrated reduced growth rates, increased fibronectin production, and abnormal morphologies similar to fibroblasts isolated from venous ulcers. This study suggests that pressure elevations (like venous hypertension) can directly result in altered cell function and morphology that may contribute to the delayed wound healing seen in patients with venous ulcers. This model uses a pressurized incubator that may prove to be a valuable adjunct in studying the effects of venous hypertension.