Optimizing the Management Algorithm for Esophageal Dysphagia After Index Endoscopy: Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Minimization Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Guidelines advise esophageal motility testing for dysphagia when structural disorders are ruled out, but cost concerns impede adoption. We evaluated cost-effective positioning of esophageal motility testing in the algorithm to evaluate esophageal dysphagia. METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model comparing 3 strategies: (i) esophageal manometry, (ii) screening impedance planimetry followed by esophageal manometry if needed, or (iii) nonalgorithmic usual care. Diagnostic test accuracy was adapted to expected rates of esophageal motility disorders in general gastroenterology populations. We modeled routine testing for all patients with nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia compared with selective testing with strong suspicion for achalasia. Cost outcomes were defined on national commercial and Medicare datasets stratified on age and sex. Health outcomes were modeled on populations with achalasia. The time horizon was 1 year. RESULTS: Motility testing was preferred over nonalgorithmic usual care due to cost savings rather than health gains. To commercial insurers, routine esophageal manometry for nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia would be cost-saving below a reimbursed cost of $2,415. Screening impedance planimetry would be cost saving below a reimbursed cost of $1,130. The limit for reimbursed costs would be lower for patients older than 65 years to achieve cost savings mainly due to insurance. Sex did not significantly influence cost-effectiveness. Patients and insurers preferred routine screening impedance planimetry before manometry when the index of suspicion for achalasia was below 6%. DISCUSSION: Aligning with practice guidelines, routine esophageal motility testing seems cost saving to patients and insurers compared with nonalgorithmic usual care to evaluate nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia. Choice of testing should be guided by index of suspicion.

A Linked Electronic Medical Record-Claims Analysis of the Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Patients Coded for Erosive Esophagitis in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Erosive esophagitis (EE) is a severe form of gastroesophageal reflux disease commonly treated with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The aim of this retrospective, observational cohort study was to describe the characteristics and healthcare burden of patients with EE. METHODS: We identified adults in the USA with an EE diagnosis between January  1, 2016 and February 28, 2019 in a linked dataset containing electronic health records (EHR) from the Veradigm Network EHR and claims data from Komodo Health. Patients were required to have 1 year of baseline data and 3 years of follow-up data. Patients were stratified by the number of PPI lines of therapy (LOT) during the 4-year study period. We descriptively captured patient characteristics and treatment patterns, along with all-cause and EE-related healthcare utilization and costs. RESULTS: Among the 158,347 qualifying adults with EE, 71,958 (45.4%) had 1 PPI LOT, 14,985 (9.5%) had 2 LOTs, 15,129 (9.6%) had 3+ LOTs, and 56,275 (35.5%) did not fill a PPI prescription. Omeprazole and pantoprazole comprised more than 70% of any LOT, with patients commonly switching between the two. Mean (standard deviation) annualized all-cause and EE-related healthcare costs in the follow-up period were $16,853 ($70,507) and $523 ($3659), respectively. Both all-cause and EE-related healthcare costs increased with LOTs. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with EE are commonly treated with prescription PPIs; however, 19.0% of patients cycled through multiple PPIs. Higher PPI use was associated with a higher comorbidity burden and higher healthcare costs compared to 0 PPI use.

Optimizing the Management Algorithm for Heartburn in General Gastroenterology: Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Minimization Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Heartburn is the most common symptom seen in gastroenterology practice. We aimed to optimize cost-effective evaluation and management of heartburn. METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model from insurer and patient perspectives comparing 4 strategies for patients failing empiric proton pump inhibitors (PPIs): (1) PPI optimization without testing, (2) endoscopy with PPI optimization for all patients, (3) endoscopy with PPI discontinuation when erosive findings are absent, and (4) endoscopy/ambulatory reflux monitoring with PPI discontinuation as appropriate for phenotypic management. Health outcomes were respectively defined on systematic reviews of clinical trials. Cost outcomes were defined on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services databases and commercial multipliers for direct healthcare costs, and national observational studies evaluating healthcare utilization. The time horizon was 1 year. All testing was performed off PPI. RESULTS: PPI optimization without testing cost $3784/y to insurers and $3128 to patients due to lower work productivity and suboptimal symptom relief. Endoscopy with PPI optimization lowered insurer costs by $1020/y and added 11 healthy days/y by identifying erosive reflux disease. Endoscopy with PPI discontinuation added 11 additional healthy days/y by identifying patients without erosive reflux disease that did not need PPI. By optimizing phenotype-guided treatment, endoscopy/ambulatory reflux monitoring with a trial of PPI discontinuation was the most effective of all strategies (gaining 22 healthy days/y) and saved $2183 to insurers and $2396 to patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with heartburn, endoscopy with ambulatory reflux monitoring (off PPI) optimizes cost-effective management by matching treatment to phenotype. When erosive findings are absent, trialing PPI discontinuation is more cost-effective than optimizing PPI.

Healthcare costs among patients with newly diagnosed helicobacter pylori infection in the United States: a linked claims-EHR study.

AIMS: The study objectives were to 1) characterize the cost drivers of patients with Helicobacter pylori (HP) and 2) estimate HP-related cost savings following lab-confirmed HP eradication with US guideline-recommended treatment compared to failed eradication. METHODS: We identified adults newly diagnosed with HP between 1/1/2016-12/31/2019 in the Veradigm Electronic Health Record Database linked to claims data (earliest HP diagnosis = index date). For the overall costs analysis, we required patients to have data available for ≥12 months before and after the index date. Then, we used multivariable modeling to assess the marginal effects of comorbidities on all cause-healthcare costs in the 12 months following HP diagnosis. For the eradication savings analysis, we identified patients with ≥1 HP eradication regimen, a subsequent HP lab test result, and ≥1 year of data after the test result. Then we used multivariable modeling to estimate HP-related cost while adjusting for eradication status, demographics, post-testing HP-related clinical variables, and the interactions between eradication status and each HP-related clinical variable. RESULTS: The overall cost analysis included 60,593 patients with HP (mean age 54.2 years, 65.5% female). Mean (SD) 12-month unadjusted all-cause costs were $23,693 ($78,089). Rare comorbidities demonstrated the highest marginal effect. The marginal effects of gastric cancer and PUD were $15,705 and $7,323, respectively. In the eradication savings analysis, 1,835 (80.0%) of the 2295 patients had lab test-confirmed HP eradication. Compared to failed eradication, there were significant one-year cost savings among patients with successful HP eradication and select conditions: $1,770 for PUD, $518 for atrophic gastritis, $494 for functional dyspepsia, and $352 for gastritis. CONCLUSIONS: The healthcare costs of patients with HP are partially confounded by their burden of high-cost comorbidities. In the subset of patients with available results, confirmed vs. failed eradication of HP was associated with short-term cost offsets among those with specific to HP-related sequelae.

Helicobacter pylori (HP) is a common infection. We aimed to better understand healthcare costs for people infected with HP. Specifically, we were interested in 1) investigating whether complications from HP were causing high costs. 2) whether successful eradication of HP would lead to lower healthcare costs. We captured data on adults diagnosed with HP between 2016 and 2019. The data used in this study came from medical records and insurance bills. In the first part of the study, we found that patients with HP often have other health issues, and these other health issues were driving high healthcare costs. The majority of cost savings associated with HP eradication accrue from the prevention of potential complications of long-term infection, such as peptic ulcer disease and, rarely, gastric cancer.

Interrater Reliability of Functional Lumen Imaging Probe Panometry and High-Resolution Manometry for the Assessment of Esophageal Motility Disorders.

INTRODUCTION: High-resolution manometry (HRM) and functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) are primary and/or complementary diagnostic tools for the evaluation of esophageal motility. We aimed to assess the interrater agreement and accuracy of HRM and FLIP interpretations. METHODS: Esophageal motility specialists from multiple institutions completed the interpretation of 40 consecutive HRM and 40 FLIP studies. Interrater agreement was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for continuous variables and Fleiss' κ statistics for nominal variables. Accuracies of rater interpretation were assessed using the consensus of 3 experienced raters as the reference standard. RESULTS: Fifteen raters completed the HRM and FLIP studies. An excellent interrater agreement was seen in supine median integral relaxation pressure (ICC 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.95-0.98), and a good agreement was seen with the assessment of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow, peristalsis, and assignment of a Chicago Classification version 4.0 diagnosis using HRM (κ = 0.71, 0.75, and 0.70, respectively). An excellent interrater agreement for EGJ distensibility index and maximum diameter (0.91 [0.90-0.94], 0.92 [0.89-0.95]) was seen, and a moderate-to-good agreement was seen in the assignment of EGJ opening classification, contractile response pattern, and motility classification (κ = 0.68, 0.56, and 0.59, respectively) on FLIP. Rater accuracy for Chicago Classification version 4.0 diagnosis on HRM was 82% (95% confidence interval 78%-84%) and for motility diagnosis on FLIP Panometry was 78% (95% confidence interval 72%-81%). DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates high levels of interrater agreement and accuracy in the interpretation of HRM and FLIP metrics and moderate-to-high levels for motility classification in FLIP, supporting the use of these approaches for primary or complementary evaluation of esophageal motility disorders.

Helicobacter pylori infection treatment in the United States: clinical consequences and costs of eradication treatment failure.

INTRODUCTION: Helicobacter pylori (Hp) is causal in benign and malignant gastrointestinal diseases. Accordingly, current guidelines recommend Hp eradication in patients with active infection. Unfortunately, treatment failure is common, exposing patients to complications associated with persistent Hp infection and consequences of repeated treatment, including promotion of antibiotic resistance. In the United States (US), data regarding eradication rates with available therapies are limited. Moreover, the clinical and economic burden of eradication treatment failure have not been thoroughly described. AREAS COVERED: We aimed to characterize Hp eradication rates and the clinical consequences and associated costs of persistent Hp infection among US adults. We conducted focused literature reviews using initial searches in Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews via Ovid followed by manual searches to identify relevant publications. EXPERT OPINION: Hp eradication rates were suboptimal, with most studies reporting rates ≤80% with clarithromycin-based triple therapy and bismuth quadruple therapy. There was direct evidence supporting numerous benefits of successful Hp eradication, including decreased risk of recurrent or complicated peptic disease and non-cardia gastric cancer. Cost benefits of eradication were related to mitigation of conditions associated with persistent Hp infection, (e.g. complicated peptic ulcer disease, and gastric cancer) which altogether exceed US$5.3 billion.

Variability in endoscopic assessment of Nissen fundoplication wrap integrity and hiatus herniation.

BACKGROUND: Upper endoscopy (EGD) is frequently performed in patients with esophageal complaints following anti-reflux surgery such as fundoplication. Endoscopic evaluation of fundoplication wrap integrity can be challenging. Our primary aim in this pilot study was to evaluate the accuracy and confidence of assessing Nissen fundoplication integrity and hiatus herniation among gastroenterology (GI) fellows, subspecialists, and foregut surgeons. METHODS: Five variations of post-Nissen fundoplication anatomy were included in a survey of 20 sets of EGD images that was completed by GI fellows, general GI attendings, esophagologists, and foregut surgeons. Accuracy, diagnostic confidence, and inter-rater agreement across providers were evaluated. RESULTS: There were 31 respondents in the final cohort. Confidence in pre-survey diagnostics significantly differed by provider type (mean confidence out of 5 was 1.8 for GI fellows, 2.7 for general GI attendings, 3.6 for esophagologists, and 3.6 for foregut surgeons, P = 0.01). The mean overall accuracy was 45.9%, which significantly differed by provider type with the lowest rate among GI fellows (37%) and highest among esophagologists (53%; P = 0.01). The accuracy was highest among esophagologists across all wrap integrity variations. Inter-rater agreement was low across wrap integrity variations (Krippendorf's alpha <0.30), indicating low to no agreement between providers. CONCLUSION: In this multi-center survey study, GI fellows had the lowest accuracy and confidence in assessing EGD images after Nissen fundoplication, whereas esophagologists had the highest. Diagnostic confidence varied considerably and inter-rater agreement was poor. These findings suggest experience may improve confidence, but highlight the need to improve the evaluation of fundoplication wraps.

Chicago classification version 4.0© technical review: Update on standard high-resolution manometry protocol for the assessment of esophageal motility.

The Chicago Classification v4.0 (CCv4.0) is the updated classification scheme for esophageal motility disorders using metrics from high-resolution manometry (HRM). A key feature of CCv.4.0 is the more rigorous and expansive protocol that incorporates single wet swallows acquired in different positions (supine, upright) and provocative testing, including multiple rapid swallows and rapid drink challenge. Additionally, solid bolus swallows, solid test meal, and/or pharmacologic provocation can be used to identify clinically relevant motility disorders and other conditions (eg, rumination) that occur during and after meals. The acquisition and analysis for performing these tests and the evidence supporting their inclusion in the Chicago Classification protocol is detailed in this technical review. Provocative tests are designed to increase the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of HRM studies for disorders of esophageal motility. These changes attempt to minimize ambiguity in prior iterations of Chicago Classification, decrease the proportion of HRM studies that deliver inconclusive diagnoses and increase the number of patients with a clinically relevant diagnosis that can direct effective therapy. Another aim in establishing a standard manometry protocol for motility laboratories around the world is to facilitate procedural consistency, improve diagnostic reliability, and promote collaborative research.

Esophageal Manometry Competency Program Improves Gastroenterology Fellow Performance in Motility Interpretation.

INTRODUCTION: Competency-based medical education (CBME) for interpretation of esophageal manometry is lacking; therefore, motility experts and instructional designers developed the esophageal manometry competency (EMC) program: a personalized, adaptive learning program for interpretation of esophageal manometry. The aim of this study was to implement EMC among Gastroenterology (GI) trainees and assess the impact of EMC on competency in manometry interpretation. METHODS: GI fellows across 14 fellowship programs were invited to complete EMC from February 2018 to October 2018. EMC includes an introductory video, baseline assessment of manometry interpretation, individualized learning pathways, and final assessment of manometry interpretation. The primary outcome was competency for interpretation in 7 individual skill sets. RESULTS: Forty-four GI trainees completed EMC. Participants completed 30 cases, each including 7 skill sets. At baseline, 4 (9%) participants achieved competency for all 7 skills compared with 24 (55%) at final assessment (P < 0.001). Competency in individual skills increased from a median of 4 skills at baseline to 7 at final assessment (P < 0.001). The greatest increase in skill competency was for diagnosis (Baseline: 11% vs Final: 68%; P < 0.001). Accuracy improved for distinguishing between 5 diagnostic groups and was highest for the Outflow obstructive motility disorder (Baseline: 49% vs Final: 76%; P < 0.001) and Normal motor function (50% vs 80%; P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: This prospective multicenter implementation study highlights that an adaptive web-based training platform is an effective tool to promote CBME. EMC completion was associated with significant improvement in identifying clinically relevant diagnoses, providing a model for integrating CBME into subspecialized areas of training.

An Automated Inpatient Split-dose Bowel Preparation System Improves Colonoscopy Quality and Reduces Repeat Procedures.

BACKGROUND/GOALS: Inpatient colonoscopy preparations are often inadequate, compromising patient safety and procedure quality, while resulting in greater hospital costs. The aims of this study were to: (1) design and implement an electronic inpatient split-dose bowel preparation order set; (2) assess the intervention's impact upon preparation adequacy, repeated colonoscopies, hospital days, and costs. STUDY: We conducted a single center prospective pragmatic quasiexperimental study of hospitalized adults undergoing colonoscopy. The experimental intervention was designed using DMAIC (define, measure, analyze, improve, and control) methodology. Prospective data collected over 12 months were compared with data from a historical preintervention cohort. The primary outcome was bowel preparation quality and secondary outcomes included number of repeated procedures, hospital days, and costs. RESULTS: On the basis of a Delphi method and DMAIC process, we created an electronic inpatient bowel preparation order set inclusive of a split-dose bowel preparation algorithm, automated orders for rescue medications, and nursing bowel preparation checks. The analysis data set included 969 patients, 445 (46%) in the postintervention group. The adequacy of bowel preparation significantly increased following intervention (86% vs. 43%; P<0.01) and proportion of repeated procedures decreased (2.0% vs. 4.6%; P=0.03). Mean hospital days from bowel preparation initiation to discharge decreased from 8.0 to 6.9 days (P=0.02). The intervention resulted in an estimated 1-year cost-savings of $46,076 based on a reduction in excess hospital days associated with repeated and delayed procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Our interdisciplinary initiative targeting inpatient colonoscopy preparations significantly improved quality and reduced repeat procedures, and hospital days. Other institutions should consider utilizing this framework to improve inpatient colonoscopy value.

Diagnosis of Esophageal Motility Disorders: Esophageal Pressure Topography vs. Conventional Line Tracing.

OBJECTIVES: Enhanced characterization of esophageal peristaltic and sphincter function provided by esophageal pressure topography (EPT) offers a potential diagnostic advantage over conventional line tracings (CLT). However, high-resolution manometry (HRM) and EPT require increased equipment costs over conventional systems and evidence demonstrating a significant diagnostic advantage of EPT over CLT is limited. Our aim was to investigate whether the inter-rater agreement and/or accuracy of esophageal motility diagnosis differed between EPT and CLT. METHODS: Forty previously completed patient HRM studies were selected for analysis using a customized software program developed to perform blinded independent interpretation in either EPT or CLT (six pressure sensors) format. Six experienced gastroenterologists with a clinical focus in esophageal disease (attendings) and six gastroenterology trainees with minimal manometry experience (fellows) from three academic centers interpreted each of the 40 studies using both EPT and CLT formats. Rater diagnoses were assessed for inter-rater agreement and diagnostic accuracy, both for exact diagnosis and for correct identification of a major esophageal motility disorder. RESULTS: The total group agreement was moderate (κ=0.57; 95% CI: 0.56-0.59) for EPT and fair (κ=0.32; 0.30-0.33) for CLT. Inter-rater agreement between attendings was good (κ=0.68; 0.65-0.71) for EPT and moderate (κ=0.46; 0.43-0.50) for CLT. Inter-rater agreement between fellows was moderate (κ=0.48; 0.45-0.50) for EPT and poor to fair (κ=0.20; 0.17-0.24) for CLT. Among all raters, the odds of an incorrect exact esophageal motility diagnosis were 3.3 times higher with CLT assessment than with EPT (OR: 3.3; 95% CI: 2.4-4.5; P<0.0001), and the odds of incorrect identification of a major motility disorder were 3.4 times higher with CLT than with EPT (OR: 3.4; 2.4-5.0; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Superior inter-rater agreement and diagnostic accuracy of esophageal motility diagnoses were demonstrated with analysis using EPT over CLT among our selected raters. On the basis of these findings, EPT may be the preferred assessment modality of esophageal motility.

Predictors of Inadequate Inpatient Colonoscopy Preparation and Its Association with Hospital Length of Stay and Costs.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Adequate bowel preparation is essential to safe and effective inpatient colonoscopy. Predictors of poor inpatient colonoscopy preparation and the economic impacts of inadequate inpatient preparations are not defined. The aims of this study were to (1) determine risk factors for inadequate inpatient bowel preparations, and (2) examine the association between inadequate inpatient bowel preparation and hospital length of stay (LOS) and costs. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients undergoing inpatient colonoscopy preparation over 12 months (1/1/2013-12/31/2013). RESULTS: Of 524 identified patients, 22.3% had an inadequate preparation. A multiple logistic regression model identified the following potential predictors of inadequate bowel preparation: lower income (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.04, 1.22), opiate or tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) use (OR 1.55; 0.98, 2.46), and afternoon colonoscopy (OR 1.66; 1.07, 2.59); as well as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class ≥3 (OR 1.15; 1.05, 1.25) and symptoms of nausea/vomiting (OR 1.14; 1.04, 1.25) when a fair preparation was considered inadequate. Inadequate bowel preparation was associated with significantly increased hospital LOS (model relative mean estimate 1.25; 95% CI 1.03, 1.51) and hospital costs (estimate 1.31; 1.03, 1.67) when compared to adequate preparations. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of inadequate inpatient bowel preparations is high and associated with a significant increase in hospital LOS and costs. We identified five potential predictors of inadequate inpatient preparation: lower socioeconomic class, opiate/TCA use, afternoon colonoscopies, ASA class ≥3, and pre-preparation nausea/vomiting; these data should guide future initiatives to improve the quality of inpatient bowel preparations.

Disparities in endoscopy use for colorectal cancer screening in the United States.

It is well established that disparities exist for colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence rates and death. With screening, death from CRC may be considered a preventable occurrence. Endoscopy (flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy) is the only modality with therapeutic benefit of removal of pre-cancerous polyps. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act mandated that preventive screening services be covered, which includes endoscopy for colon cancer screening. Recent federal rules have eliminated cost sharing for polyp removal during screening colonoscopy in privately insured patients; however, this has not been mandated for Medicare patients. Understanding the current state of disparities in endoscopy use is important, as these policy changes will affect millions of patients. The purpose of this literature review was to summarize the known research on disparities in endoscopy use for colon cancer screening in the United States and highlight areas for future research.