Functional dyspepsia leads to more healthcare utilization in secondary care compared with other functional gastrointestinal disorders.

OBJECTIVE: Functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) are known to have a significant impact on patients' quality of life and lead to a greater healthcare burden. In this study we aimed to investigate whether this healthcare burden differs among various types of FGIDs in secondary care. METHODS: A retrospective study of consecutive adults with luminal gastrointestinal (GI) diseases in a secondary healthcare gastroenterology clinic was conducted. The frequency of FGIDs and differences in healthcare utilization among different types of FGIDs were explored. RESULTS: Among 1206 patients with luminal GI disease, 442 (36.7%) had FGIDs. FGIDs patients were older (67 y vs 62 y, P < 0.001) with a higher proportion of women (61.8% vs 50.4%, P < 0.001) than those without FGIDs. Functional dyspepsia (FD) was the most common FGIDs (36.9%), followed by irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) (30.3%). A high healthcare burden (defined as over one GI endoscopy or imaging examination over 5 years, or one or more unscheduled visit to general practitioner or emergency department or hospitalization annually) was observed among 53.8% of the FGIDs patients. FD was associated with a high healthcare burden (high vs low burden: 43.7% vs 28.9%, P = 0.001) while IBS was associated with lower healthcare burden (high vs low burden: 25.2% vs 36.3%, P = 0.012). On multivariate analysis, only FD was significantly associated with high healthcare burden (adjusted odds ratio 1.996, 95% confidence interval 1.117-3.567, P = 0.020). CONCLUSION: Compared with other FGIDs, FD was the most common condition in secondary care, and it was associated with the greatest healthcare burden.

Gender Disparity in Academic Gastroenterology: Beginning of the End of the Underrepresentation of Women?

BACKGROUND: Though there are an increasing number of female medical graduates, women remain underrepresented in academic medicine. There have been several reasons to explain this gender disparity, including marital status, number of children, number of hours worked, job flexibility, perceptions of women as inferior leaders, gender bias, sexual harassment, and unsupportive academic climates. AIMS: This study aimed to investigate the relationship between scholarly productivity and the representation of female gastroenterologists in academia. Specifically, scholarly productivity measured by the h-index and academic rank were explored to determine if there were gender disparities in academic productivity and rank in gastroenterology. METHODS: Gastroenterology departmental listings were obtained from the Fellowship and Residency Interactive Database of the American Medical Association. The Scopus database was used to record each physician's h-index. Statistical analyses were conducted with Wilcoxon rank-sum test, which compared matched samples by academic rank, and ANOVA tests, which compared multiple academic ranks. RESULTS: Out of 1703 academic gastroenterologists, women account for 25% of academic physicians. Women have statistically lower h-indices at the level of Assistant Professor (p = 0.0012), and at the level of Chair (p = 0.01). There was no difference in h-indices between male and female at the rank of Associate Professor and Professor. CONCLUSIONS: While these results mirror patterns appreciated in other fields of medicine, the results at the rank of Chair may suggest that despite the lower h-index compared to their male counterparts, females are perceived as having strong inherent leadership skills outside of academic productivity that are also conducive to leading a department and may be contributing to their rise to Chair.

Association of Care Coordination Experience and Health Services Use with Main Provider Type for Children with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

OBJECTIVES: To describe care coordination experience for families of children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and compare use of health services between families who identified a primary care physician (PCP) vs a gastroenterologist as a child's main provider. STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional survey of care coordination experiences and health services use for children 6-19 years old receiving care in the IBD program at a children's hospital during 2018. English-speaking parents completed the Family Experiences with Coordination of Care Survey about their child's main provider and reported past-year health services. Bivariate testing and multivariate logistic regression explored differences in care coordination experience and health services by main provider, adjusted for demographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: A total of 113 of 270 (42%) invited patients participated. Among 101 patients with complete data, 41% identified a PCP main provider. Performance on 5 of 16 Family Experiences with Coordination of Care indicators was higher for patients reporting a gastroenterologist vs a PCP main provider. However, having a PCP vs gastroenterologist main provider was associated with greater use of any past-year primary care services (adjusted proportion 94% vs 75%; P = .01) and of mental health services when needed (95% vs 60%; P < .01). Need for IBD-related hospitalization and emergency department visits did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Children with IBD may experience trade-offs in care coordination quality and important, non-disease-focused health services based on whom parents perceive as the main provider. Efforts to enhance cross-team coordination among families and primary and specialty care teams are needed to improve overall care quality.

Changes in digestive cancer diagnosis during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Italy: A nationwide survey.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has had a huge impact on healthcare systems, resulting in many routine diagnostic procedures either being halted or postponed. AIMS: To evaluate whether the diagnoses of colorectal, gastric and pancreatic cancers have been impacted by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Italy. METHODS: A survey designed to collect the number of histologically-proven diagnoses of the three cancers in gastroenterology services across Italy from January 1 to October 31 in 2017-2020. Non-parametric ANOVA for repeated measurements was applied to compare distributions by years and macro-areas. RESULTS: Compared to 2019, in 2020 gastric cancer diagnoses decreased by 15.9%, CRC by 11.9% and pancreatic by 9.9%. CRC distributions showed significant differences between all years, stomach cancer between 2018 and 2020 and 2019-2020, and pancreatic cancer only between 2017 and 2019. The 2019-2020 comparison showed fewer CRC diagnoses in the North (-13.7%), Center (-16.5%) and South (-4.1%), fewer stomach cancers in the North (-19.0%) and South (-9.4%), and fewer pancreatic cancers in the North (-14.1%) and Center (-4.7%), with an increase in the South (+12.3%). Distributions of CRC and gastric cancer were significantly different between all years in the North. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights the concerning effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnostic yield of gastroenterology services for stomach, colorectal and pancreatic cancers in Italy.

A Novel Use of Artificial Intelligence to Examine Diversity and Hospital Performance.

BACKGROUND: The US population is becoming more racially and ethnically diverse. Research suggests that cultural diversity within organizations can increase team potency and performance, yet this theory has not been explored in the field of surgery. Furthermore, when surveyed, patients express a desire for their care provider to mirror their own race and ethnicity. In the present study, we hypothesize that there is a positive correlation between a high ranking by the US News and World Report for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal (GI) surgery and greater racial, ethnic, and gender diversity among the physicians and surgeons. METHODS: We used the 2019 US News and World Report rankings for best hospitals by specialty to categorize gastroenterology and GI surgery departments into 2 groups: 1-50 and 51-100. Hospital websites of these top 100 were viewed to determine if racial diversity and inclusion were highlighted in the hospitals' core values or mission statements. To determine the rates of diversity within departments, Betaface (Betaface.com) facial analysis software was used to analyze photos taken from the hospitals' websites. This software was able to determine the race, ethnicity, and gender of the care providers. We examined the racial and ethnic makeup of the populations served by these hospitals to see if the gastroenterologists and surgeons adequately represented the state population. We then ran the independent samples t-test to determine if there was a difference in rankings of more diverse departments. RESULTS: Hospitals with gastroenterology and GI surgery departments in the top 50 were more likely to mention diversity on their websites compared with hospitals that ranked from 51-100 (76% versus 56%; P = 0.035). The top 50 hospitals had a statistically significant higher percentage of underrepresented minority GI physicians and surgeons (7.01% versus 4.04%; P < 0.001). In the 31 states where these hospitals were located, there were more African Americans (13% versus 3%; P < 0.001) and Hispanics (12% versus 2%; P < 0.001), while there were fewer Asians (4% versus 21%; P < 0.001) in the population compared with the faculty. CONCLUSIONS: We used artificial intelligence software to determine the degree of racial and ethnic diversity in gastroenterology and GI surgery departments across the county. Higher ranking hospitals had a greater degree of diversity of their faculty and were more likely to emphasize diversity in their mission statements. Hospitals stress the importance of having a culturally diverse staff, yet their care providers may not adequately reflect the populations they serve. Further work is needed to prospectively track diversity rates over time and correlate these changes with measurable outcomes.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Training: Global Perceptions of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Fellows in the USA.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted numerous facets of healthcare workers' lives. There have also been significant changes in Gastroenterology (GI) fellowship training as a result of the challenges presented by the pandemic. AIMS: We conducted a national survey of Gastroenterology fellows to evaluate fellows' perceptions, changes in clinical duties, and education during the pandemic. METHODS: A survey was sent to Gastroenterology (GI) fellows in the USA. Information regarding redeployment, fellow restriction in endoscopy, outpatient clinics and inpatient consults, impact on educational activities, and available wellness resources was obtained. Fellows' level of agreement with adjustments to clinical duties was also assessed. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-seven Gastroenterology fellows responded, and 29.4% were redeployed to non-GI services during the pandemic. COVID-19 impacted all aspects of GI fellowship training in the USA (endoscopy, outpatient clinics, inpatient consults, educational activities). Fellows' level of agreement in changes to various aspects of fellowship varied. 72.5% of respondents reported that their programs provided them with increased wellness resources to cope with the additional stress during the pandemic. For respondents with children, 17.6% reported no support with childcare. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted GI fellowship training in the USA in multiple domains, including gastrointestinal endoscopy, inpatient consults, outpatient clinics, and educational conferences. Our study highlights the importance of considering and incorporating fellows' viewpoints, as changes are made in response to the ongoing pandemic.

Factors Contributing to Delay in Specialist Care After Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis in Kentucky.

BACKGROUND: Abundant studies have associated colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment delay with advanced diagnosis and worse mortality. Delay in seeking specialist is a contributor to CRC treatment delay. The goal of this study is to investigate contributing factors to 14-d delay from diagnosis of CRC on colonoscopy to the first specialist visit in the state of Kentucky. METHODS: The Kentucky Cancer Registry (KCR) database linked with health administrative claims data was queried to include adult patients diagnosed with stage I-IV CRC from January 2007 to December 2012. The dates of the last colonoscopy and the first specialist visit were identified through the claims. Bivariate and logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with delay to CRC specialist visit. RESULTS: A total of 3927 patients from 100 hospitals in Kentucky were included. Approximately, 19% of patients with CRC visited a specialist more than 14 d after CRC detection on colonoscopy. Delay to specialist (DTS) was found more likely in patients with Medicaid insurance (OR 3.1, P < 0.0001), low and moderate education level (OR 1.4 and 1.3, respectively, P = 0.0127), and stage I CRC (OR 1.5, P < 0.0001). There was a higher percentage of delay to specialist among Medicaid patients (44.0%) than Medicare (18.0%) and privately insured patients (18.8%). CONCLUSIONS: We identified Medicaid insurance, low education attainment, and early stage CRC diagnosis as independent risk factors associated with 14-d delay in seeking specialist care after CRC detection on colonoscopy.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Costs in Celiac Disease: A US Claims Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Celiac disease (CeD) is a lifelong immune-mediated enteropathy in which dietary gluten triggers an inflammatory reaction in the small intestine. This retrospective cohort study examines healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs between patients with CeD and matched controls. METHODS: Patients with CeD (cases) with an endoscopic biopsy and ≥2 medical encounters with a CeD diagnosis between January 1, 2010, and October 1, 2015, were identified in the MarketScan databases. The date of the first claim with a CeD diagnosis on or after the endoscopic biopsy was the index date. Cases were matched 1:1 to patients without CeD (controls) on demographic characteristics and Deyo-Charlson Comorbidity Index score. Clinical characteristics, all-cause, and CeD-related HRU and costs (adjusted to 2017 US dollars) were compared between cases and controls during the 12 months before (baseline) and 24 months after (follow-up) the index date. RESULTS: A total of 11,008 cases (mean age 40.6 years, 71.3% women) were matched to 11,008 controls. During the follow-up, a higher proportion of cases had all-cause and CeD-related HRU including inpatient admissions, emergency department visits, gastroenterologist visits, dietician visits, endoscopic biopsies, and gastroenterology imaging (all P ≤ 0.002). Incremental all-cause and CeD-related costs were in the first ($7,921 and $2,894) and second ($3,777 and $935) year of follow-up, driven by outpatient services costs. DISCUSSION: In this US national claims database analysis, there was evidence of an increase in both all-cause and CeD-related HRU and related costs in patients with CeD compared with matched patients without CeD, suggesting a significant economic burden associated with CeD.

Insights from a global snapshot of the change in elective colorectal practice due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: There is a need to understand the impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer care globally and determine drivers of variation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate COVID-19 impact on colorectal cancer services globally and identify predictors for behaviour change. DESIGN: An online survey of colorectal cancer service change globally in May and June 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Attending or consultant surgeons involved in the care of patients with colorectal cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in the delivery of diagnostics (diagnostic endoscopy), imaging for staging, therapeutics and surgical technique in the management of colorectal cancer. Predictors of change included increased hospital bed stress, critical care bed stress, mortality and world region. RESULTS: 191 responses were included from surgeons in 159 centers across 46 countries, demonstrating widespread service reduction with global variation. Diagnostic endoscopy was reduced in 93% of responses, even with low hospital stress and mortality; whilst rising critical care bed stress triggered complete cessation (p = 0.02). Availability of CT and MRI fell by 40-41%, with MRI significantly reduced with high hospital stress. Neoadjuvant therapy use in rectal cancer changed in 48% of responses, where centers which had ceased surgery increased its use (62 vs 30%, p = 0.04) as did those with extended delays to surgery (p<0.001). High hospital and critical care bed stresses were associated with surgeons forming more stomas (p<0.04), using more experienced operators (p<0.003) and decreased laparoscopy use (critical care bed stress only, p<0.001). Patients were also more actively prioritized for resection, with increased importance of co-morbidities and ICU need. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with severe restrictions in the availability of colorectal cancer services on a global scale, with significant variation in behaviours which cannot be fully accounted for by hospital burden or mortality.

Modeling the Hepatology Workforce in the United States: A Predicted Critical Shortage.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Liver disease is prevalent in the United States, and as the population ages, an increasing number of patients are anticipated to present for care. The state of the current hepatology workforce and future demand for hepatology providers is not known. The aim of this study was to model future projections for hepatology workforce demand. APPROACH AND RESULTS: A workforce study of hepatology providers in the United States was completed using primary and secondary data sources. An integrated workforce framework model was used that combined socioeconomic factors that drive economic demand, epidemiological factors that drive need, and utilization rates of health care services. Supply and demand projections were calculated for adult and pediatric hepatology professionals. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to cover the feasible range of these assumptions. An electronic survey of American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) members whose practice included 50% or more hepatology was conducted. In 2018, the adult and pediatric workforce included 7,296 and 824 hepatology providers, respectively, composed of hepatologists, gastroenterologists, and advanced practice providers whose practice was ≥50% hepatology. The modeling analysis projects that in 2023, 2028, and 2033, there will be shortages of 10%, 23%, and 35% adult hepatology providers, respectively, and 19%, 20%, and 16% pediatric hepatology providers, respectively. In sensitivity analyses, a shortage of hepatology providers is predicted even under optimistic assumptions. Among the respondents to the survey, the median age was higher among gastroenterologists and general hepatologists compared with transplant hepatologists. The most common category treated by transplant hepatologists was general hepatology. CONCLUSIONS: There is an impending critical shortage of adult and pediatric hepatology providers. Strategies are needed to encourage clinicians to pursue hepatology, especially in areas outside of transplant centers.

Accuracy of medical billing data against the electronic health record in the measurement of colorectal cancer screening rates.

OBJECTIVE: Medical billing data are an attractive source of secondary analysis because of their ease of use and potential to answer population-health questions with statistical power. Although these datasets have known susceptibilities to biases, the degree to which they can distort the assessment of quality measures such as colorectal cancer screening rates are not widely appreciated, nor are their causes and possible solutions. METHODS: Using a billing code database derived from our institution's electronic health records, we estimated the colorectal cancer screening rate of average-risk patients aged 50-74 years seen in primary care or gastroenterology clinic in 2016-2017. 200 records (150 unscreened, 50 screened) were sampled to quantify the accuracy against manual review. RESULTS: Out of 4611 patients, an analysis of billing data suggested a 61% screening rate, an estimate that matches the estimate by the Centers for Disease Control. Manual review revealed a positive predictive value of 96% (86%-100%), negative predictive value of 21% (15%-29%) and a corrected screening rate of 85% (81%-90%). Most false negatives occurred due to examinations performed outside the scope of the database-both within and outside of our institution-but 21% of false negatives fell within the database's scope. False positives occurred due to incomplete examinations and inadequate bowel preparation. Reasons for screening failure include ordered but incomplete examinations (48%), lack of or incorrect documentation by primary care (29%) including incorrect screening intervals (13%) and patients declining screening (13%). CONCLUSIONS: Billing databases are prone to substantial bias that may go undetected even in the presence of confirmatory external estimates. Caution is recommended when performing population-level inference from these data. We propose several solutions to improve the use of these data for the assessment of healthcare quality.

Training in Bariatric Surgery: a National Survey of German Bariatric Surgeons.

INTRODUCTION: Skill in bariatric surgery has been associated with postoperative outcome. Appropriate surgical training is of paramount importance. In order to continuously improve training strategies, it is necessary to assess current practices. AIM: To determine how German bariatric surgeons have been trained and to assess current training strategies. METHODS: Between February 2017 and March 2017, an online census of surgeons registered as members of the German Society for Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery was conducted. A total of three reminders were sent out. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Data was reported as median (interquartile range); percentages were adjusted for completed answers only. RESULTS: A response rate of 51% (n = 214) was achieved. Surgeons reported a median of 14.5 (8-20) years of surgical experience after initial training, with a specific bariatric experience of 7 (4-13) years. The total cumulative bariatric case volume was 240 (80-500) cases, with an annual case volume of 50 (25-80). The most commonly applied approaches to bariatric skills acquisition were "learning by doing" (71%), "course participation" (70%) and "observerships" (70%). Fellowships and the use of operating videos were less frequently applied strategies (19%/ 47%). Interestingly, observerships (94%) and course participation (89%) were rated as very important/important, whereas "learning by doing" (62%), watching operation videos (59%), and fellowships (48%) were less frequently perceived as important/very important training strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of surgeons performing bariatric cases were senior surgeons with more than 10 years of post-training experience; nevertheless, the survey revealed a lack of structured approaches to bariatric specialization training.

Healthcare use by 30,000 patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in France: a 5-year retrospective and one-year prospective national observational study.

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) can be responsible for alteration in quality of life and economic burden. The aim of this study was to evaluate healthcare use related to this disorder in France. METHODS: The French health data system was used to select adults covered by the general health scheme (87% of population) through their first IBS hospitalization in 2015. We studied the healthcare refunded during the previous 5 years, 1 year before and after hospitalization. RESULTS: Among 43.7 million adults who used refunded healthcare in 2015, 29,509 patients were identified (0.07, 33% males, 67% females, mean age 52 years, 30% admitted through emergency room). During their hospitalization, 33% had upper endoscopy and 64% colonoscopy. Over the five previous years, 3% had at least one hospitalization with an IBS diagnosis, 58% had abdominal ultrasonography, 27% CT scan, 21% upper endoscopy, 13% colonoscopy and 83% a gastroenterologist visit. The year before, these rates were respectively: 0, 36, 16, 6, 4 and 78%. Some of those rates decreased the year after the hospitalization with respectively: 1, 27, 13, 5, 4 and 19%. The year before, 65% had at least one CRP dosage (13% three or more), 58% a TSH dosage (7%) and 8% a test for coeliac diseases (1%) and the year after: 44% (8%), 43% (5%) and 3% (0.3%). At least one refund of a drug used to treat IBS was found for 85% of patients 5 years before, 65% one year before and 51% one year after. CONCLUSION: This first study using French health data system for healthcare consumption assessment in IBS points out the repetition of outpatient visits, examinations and in particular radiological examinations, without a strong decrease after hospitalization for IBS and gastroenterologist visit.

Same-Day vs Different-Day Elective Upper and Lower Endoscopic Procedures by Setting.

Importance: Performing elective upper and lower endoscopic procedures on the same day is a patient-centered and less costly approach than a 2-stage approach performed on different days, when clinically appropriate. Whether this practice pattern varies based on practice setting has not been studied. Objectives: To estimate the rate of different-day upper and lower endoscopic procedures in 3 types of outpatient settings and investigate the factors associated with the performance of these procedures on different days. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective analysis was conducted of Medicare claims between January 1, 2011, and June 30, 2018, for Medicare beneficiaries who underwent a pair of upper and lower endoscopic procedures performed within 90 days of each other at hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), and physician offices. Main Outcomes and Measures: Undergoing an upper and a lower endoscopic procedure on different days, adjusted for patient characteristics (age, sex, race/ethnicity, residence location and region, comorbidity, and procedure indication) and physician characteristics (sex, years in practice, procedure volume, and primary specialty). Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs were calculated. Results: A total of 4 028 587 procedure pairs were identified, of which 52.5% were performed in HOPDs, 43.3% in ASCs, and 4.2% in physician offices. The rate of different-day procedures was 13.6% in HOPDs, 22.2% in ASCs, and 47.7% in physician offices. For the 7564 physicians who practiced at both HOPDs and ASCs, their different-day procedure rate changed from 14.1% at HOPDs to 19.4% at ASCs. For the 993 physicians who practiced at both HOPDs and physician offices, their different-day procedure rate changed from 15.8% at HOPDs to 37.4% at physician offices. Patients were more likely to undergo different-day procedures at physician offices and ASCs compared with HOPDs, even after adjusting for patient and physician characteristics (physician office vs HOPD: aOR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.85-2.20; ASC vs HOPD: aOR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.23-1.32). Older age (85-94 years vs 65-74 years: aOR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.08-1.11; 95 years or older vs 65-74 years: aOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.26), black and Hispanic race/ethnicity (black: aOR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.12-1.17; Hispanic: aOR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.10-1.14), and residing in the Northeast region (adjusted OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.28-1.36) were risk factors for undergoing different-day procedures. Micropolitan location (aOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.96) and rural location (aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.89-0.93), more comorbidities (≥5: aOR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.74-0.76), physician's fewer years in practice (aOR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.81-0.87), physician's higher procedure volume (aOR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.62-0.68), and physician's specialty of general surgery (aOR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.80-0.91) were protective factors. Conclusions and Relevance: Physician offices and ASCs had much higher different-day procedure rates compared with HOPDs. This disparity may represent an opportunity for quality improvement and financial savings for common endoscopic procedures.