Prevalence of extra-intestinal symptoms according to irritable bowel syndrome subtype.

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a functional disorder commonly associated with extra-intestinal symptoms. However, the prevalence of these symptoms according to IBS subtype is not well established. AIM: To compare the prevalence of extra-intestinal symptoms among patients with different subtypes of IBS. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study including patients with IBS according to Rome IV criteria was performed between July 2022 and April 2023. Patients were classified according their subtype of IBS: IBS-D (diarrhea-predominant), IBS-C (constipation-predominant), and IBS-M (mixed bowel habits). Patients completed the IBS severity scoring system questionnaire (IBS-SSS) to determine severity of IBS symptoms and patient health questionnaire- 9 (PHQ-9) to define presence and severity of depressive symptoms. The prevalence of reported extra-intestinal symptoms was also assessed and compared between groups. KEY RESULTS: A total of 4862 patients with IBS were included; 608 IBS-D (12.5%), 1978 IBS-C (40.7%), and 2276 IBS-M (46.8%). Patients with IBS-C had significantly lower IBS-symptoms severity (mean IBS-SSS 290 vs. 310 and 320 for IBS-D and IBS-M, respectively, p = 0.03). The prevalence of obesity was also significantly lower in these patients (17.1% vs. 30.9% IBS-D and 27.9% IBS-M, p = 0.0001). Patients with IBS-D showed a significantly higher prevalence of food intolerance perception (9.5%, p = 0.03), history of cholecystectomy (17.8%, p = 0.03), and fecal incontinence (36.2%, p = 0.0001) as compared to the other groups. Patients with IBS-M had significantly higher mean PHQ-9 score (12.7 vs. 11.1 IBS-D and 10.5 IBS-C, p = 0.001) and prevalence of depressive symptoms (80.0%, p = 0.01). Patients with IBS-M also had higher prevalence of extra-intestinal symptoms such as arthralgia (62.4%, p = 0.0001), extremity numbness (64.5%, p = 0.0001), atopic dermatitis (28.2%, p = 0.02), and chronic cervicalgia (81.0%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: The prevalence of most extra-intestinal symptoms is higher among patients with IBS-M. Further research is needed to better characterize IBS subtypes, which could potentially help refining tailored therapeutic strategies.

Management of colorectal cancer screening backlog due to the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective analysis of the use of a colorectal cancer screening clinical-decision support tool in Argentina

Background The COVID-19 pandemic created a backlog in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and surveillance colonoscopies. The real impact in Argentina is not fully known. Goal To estimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on CRC prevention by comparing the number of CRC screening and surveillance consults in a clinical decision support-tool used in Argentina before, during and after pandemic lockdown. Methods We analyzed data from May 2019 to December 2021 from CaPtyVa, a clinical decision support tool for CRC screening and surveillance. Queries were divided in pre-pandemic (May 2019 to March 2020), lockdown (April 2020 to December 2020), and post-lockdown (January 2021 to December 2021). The number of CRC monthly screening and surveillance visits were compared among the three periods and stratified according to CRC risk. Results Overall, 27,563 consults were analyzed of which 9035 were screening and 18,528 were surveillance. Pre-pandemic, the median number of screening consults was 346 per month (IQR25–75 280–410). There was a decrease to 156 (80–210)/month (p < 0.005) during lockdown that partially recovered during post-lockdown to 230 (170–290)/month (p = 0.05). Pre-pandemic, the median number of surveillance consults was 716 (560–880)/month. They decreased to 354 (190–470)/month during lockdown (p < .05) and unlike screening, completely recovered during post-lockdown to 581 (450–790)/month. Conclusions There was a >50% decrease in the number of CRC screening and surveillance consults registered in CaPtyVa during lockdown in Argentina. Post-lockdown, surveillance consults recovered to pre-pandemic levels, but screening consults remained at 66% of pre-pandemic levels. This has implications for delays in CRC diagnoses and patient outcomes (AU)

Antecedentes La pandemia de COVID-19 provocó atraso en las colonoscopias de detección y vigilancia del cáncer colorrectal (CCR). Objetivo Estimar el impacto de la pandemia de COVID-19 en la prevención del CCR comparando el número de consultas de pesquisa y vigilancia del CCR en una herramienta digital de apoyo a la decisión clínica utilizada en Argentina antes, durante y después del confinamiento. Métodos Analizamos datos entre mayo 2019 a diciembre 2021 de CaPtyVa, una herramienta digital de apoyo a la toma de decisiones clínicas para la pesquisa y vigilancia del CCR. Las consultas se dividieron en prepandemia (mayo 2019- marzo 2020), confinamiento (abril 2020- diciembre 2020) y post-confinamiento (enero 2021-diciembre 2021). El número de visitas mensuales de pesquisa y vigilancia de CCR se comparó entre períodos y se estratificó según riesgo de CCR. Resultados Prepandemia, la mediana de consultas de detección fue 346 mes (IQR25-75 280-410). Hubo una disminución a 156 (80-210)/mes (p<0,005) durante el confinamiento que ascendió a 230 (170-290)/mes (p=0,05) en el post-confinamiento. Prepandemia, la mediana de consultas de vigilancia fue 716 (560-880)/mes. Disminuyeron a 354 (190-470)/mes durante el confinamiento (p<0,05) y se recuperaron por completo durante el post-confinamiento. Conclusiones Hubo una disminución >50% en el número de consultas de detección y vigilancia de CCR registradas en CaPtyVa durante el confinamiento en Argentina. Post-confinamiento, las consultas de vigilancia se recuperaron a niveles prepandemia, pero las consultas de detección se mantuvieron en el 66 % de niveles históricos. Esto tendría implicaciones en los diagnósticos y pronósticos de CCR (AU)

Colorectal Cancer Prevention: Is Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (Chat GPT) ready to Assist Physicians in Determining Appropriate Screening and Surveillance Recommendations?

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a publicly available advanced language model could help determine appropriate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and surveillance recommendations. BACKGROUND: Poor physician knowledge or inability to accurately recall recommendations might affect adherence to CRC screening guidelines. Adoption of newer technologies can help improve the delivery of such preventive care services. METHODS: An assessment with 10 multiple choice questions, including 5 CRC screening and 5 CRC surveillance clinical vignettes, was inputted into chat generative pretrained transformer (ChatGPT) 3.5 in 4 separate sessions. Responses were recorded and screened for accuracy to determine the reliability of this tool. The mean number of correct answers was then compared against a control group of gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons answering the same questions with and without the help of a previously validated CRC screening mobile app. RESULTS: The average overall performance of ChatGPT was 45%. The mean number of correct answers was 2.75 (95% CI: 2.26-3.24), 1.75 (95% CI: 1.26-2.24), and 4.5 (95% CI: 3.93-5.07) for screening, surveillance, and total questions, respectively. ChatGPT showed inconsistency and gave a different answer in 4 questions among the different sessions. A total of 238 physicians also responded to the assessment; 123 (51.7%) without and 115 (48.3%) with the mobile app. The mean number of total correct answers of ChatGPT was significantly lower than those of physicians without [5.62 (95% CI: 5.32-5.92)] and with the mobile app [7.71 (95% CI: 7.39-8.03); P < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Large language models developed with artificial intelligence require further refinements to serve as reliable assistants in clinical practice.

Management of colorectal cancer screening backlog due to the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective analysis of the use of a colorectal cancer screening clinical-decision support tool in Argentina.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic created a backlog in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and surveillance colonoscopies. The real impact in Argentina is not fully known. GOAL: To estimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on CRC prevention by comparing the number of CRC screening and surveillance consults in a clinical decision support-tool used in Argentina before, during and after pandemic lockdown. METHODS: We analyzed data from May 2019 to December 2021 from CaPtyVa, a clinical decision support tool for CRC screening and surveillance. Queries were divided in pre-pandemic (May 2019 to March 2020), lockdown (April 2020 to December 2020), and post-lockdown (January 2021 to December 2021). The number of CRC monthly screening and surveillance visits were compared among the three periods and stratified according to CRC risk. RESULTS: Overall, 27,563 consults were analyzed of which 9035 were screening and 18,528 were surveillance. Pre-pandemic, the median number of screening consults was 346 per month (IQR25-75 280-410). There was a decrease to 156 (80-210)/month (p<0.005) during lockdown that partially recovered during post-lockdown to 230 (170-290)/month (p=0.05). Pre-pandemic, the median number of surveillance consults was 716 (560-880)/month. They decreased to 354 (190-470)/month during lockdown (p<.05) and unlike screening, completely recovered during post-lockdown to 581 (450-790)/month. CONCLUSIONS: There was a >50% decrease in the number of CRC screening and surveillance consults registered in CaPtyVa during lockdown in Argentina. Post-lockdown, surveillance consults recovered to pre-pandemic levels, but screening consults remained at 66% of pre-pandemic levels. This has implications for delays in CRC diagnoses and patient outcomes.

Endoscopic scoring system utilization for inflammatory bowel disease activity assessment: A multicenter real-world study from Argentina.

BACKGROUND: The frequency and patterns of use of scores for the assessment of endoscopic activity in inflammatory bowel disease patients are not known. AIM: To describe the prevalence of adequate use of endoscopic scores in IBD patients who underwent colonoscopy in a real-life setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicenter observational study comprising six community hospitals in Argentina was undertaken. Patients with a diagnosis of Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis who underwent colonoscopy for endoscopic activity assessment between 2018 and 2022 were included. Colonoscopy reports of included subjects were manually reviewed to determine the proportion of colonoscopies that included an endoscopic score report. We determined the proportion of colonoscopy reports that included all of the IBD colonoscopy report quality elements proposed by BRIDGe group. Endoscopist's specialty, years of experience as well as expertise in IBD were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 1556 patients were included for analysis (31.94% patients with Crohn's disease). Mean age was 45.94±15.46. Endoscopic score reporting was found in 58.41% of colonoscopies. Most frequently used scores were Mayo endoscopic score (90.56%) and SES-CD (56.03%) for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, respectively. In addition, 79.11% of endoscopic reports failed to comply with all recommendations on endoscopic reporting for inflammatory bowel disease. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of endoscopic reports of inflammatory bowel disease patients do not include the description of an endoscopic score to assess mucosal inflammatory activity in a real-world setting. This is also associated with a lack of compliance in recommended criteria for proper endoscopic reporting.

Impact of an Educational Mobile App on Inflammatory Bowel Disease Colonoscopy Report Quality.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate endoscopic assessment of disease activity might lead to suboptimal treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). AIMS: We aimed to determine if the implementation of an educational mobile app could help improving the quality of colonoscopy reports in patients with IBD. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a consecutive series of colonoscopy reports in patients with IBD during the period 2016-2023. The sample was divided into two groups: before and after the implementation of an educational mobile app (JEDII app ™). The main outcome was the inclusion of validated activity assessment scoring systems and previously stablished reporting required elements. RESULTS: A total of 883 IBD colonoscopy reports were included for analysis; 621 (70.3%) procedures were performed before the implementation of the app and 262 (29.7%) after. An IBD scoring system was included in 201 (32.4%) and 148 (56.5%) colonoscopy reports before and after the adoption of the mobile app, respectively (p < 0.001). The mean number of recommended elements for quality IBD colonoscopy reporting was significantly increased after the app implementation (4.3 vs. 1.9, p < 0.001). Diagnosis of ulcerative colitis, gastroenterologist as endoscopist, endoscopist with IBD clinical interest, and the implementation of the educational mobile app were independently associated with the inclusion of an IBD score in the colonoscopy report. CONCLUSION: The inclusion of scoring systems and recommended elements for quality IBD colonoscopy report significantly increased after the implementation of an educational mobile app. E-health technologies should be further explored to improve quality of care in patients with IBD.

Usefulness of a mobile app to improve performance of specialists in responding correctly to CRC screening and surveillance clinical scenarios.

Background and study aims The adherence to and knowledge of physicians about colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and surveillance guidelines is still suboptimal, threatening the effectiveness of CRC screening. This study assessed the usefulness of a mobile decision support system (MDSS) to improve physician ability to recommend proper timing of and intervals for CRC screening and surveillance. Patients and methods This was a binational, single-blinded, randomized clinical trial including gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons from Argentina and Uruguay. The specialists were invited to respond to a questionnaire with 10 CRC screening and surveillance clinical scenarios, randomized into two groups, with and without access to a dedicated app (CaPtyVa). The main outcome measure was the proportion of physicians correctly solving at least 60 % of the clinical cases according to local guidelines. Results A total of 213 physicians were included. The proportion of physicians responding correctly at least 60 % of the vignettes was higher in the app group as compared to the control group (90 % versus 56 %) (relative risk [RR] 1.6 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.34-1.91). The performance was also higher in the app group for both vignette categories: CRC screening (93 % vs 75 % RR 1.24, 95 %CI 1.01-1.40) and surveillance (85 % vs 47 % RR 1.81 95 %CI 1.46-2.22), respectively. Physicians considered the app easy to use and of great utility in daily practice. Conclusions A MDSS was shown to be a useful tool that improved specialist performance in solving CRC screening and surveillance clinical scenarios. Its implementation in daily practice may facilitate the adherence of physicians to CRC screening and surveillance guidelines.