Training in endotherapy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a UK-wide gastroenterology trainee survey.

INTRODUCTION: Competence in endoscopic haemostasis for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is typically expected upon completion of gastroenterology training. However, training in haemostasis is currently variable without a structured training pathway. We conducted a national gastroenterology trainee survey on haemostasis exposure and on attitudes and barriers to training. METHODS: A 24-item electronic survey was distributed to UK gastroenterology trainees covering the following domains: demographics, training setup, attitudes and barriers, confidence in managing AUGIB independently and exposure to individual haemostatic modalities (supervised and independent). Responses were analysed by region and training grade to assess potential variation in training. RESULTS: A total of 181 trainees completed the questionnaire (response rate 33.5%). There was significant variation in AUGIB training setup across the UK (p<0.001), with 22.7% of trainees declaring no access to structured or ad hoc training. 31.5% expressed confidence in managing AUGIB independently; this varied by trainee grade (0% of first-year specialty trainees (ST3s) to 60.7% of final-years (ST7s)) and by training setup (p=0.001). ST7 trainees reported lack of experience with independently applying glue (86%), Hemospray (54%), heater probe (36%) and variceal banding (36%). Overall, 88% of trainees desired additional haemostasis training and 89% indicated support for a national certification process to ensure competence in AUGIB. CONCLUSION: AUGIB training in the UK is variable. The majority of gastroenterology trainees lacked confidence in haemostasis management and desired additional training. Training provision should be urgently reviewed to ensure that trainees receive adequate haemostasis exposure and are competent by completion of training.

Polyp detection rate: does length matter?

INTRODUCTION: Polyp detection rate is a surrogate marker for adenoma detection rate and therefore a surrogate marker of quality colonoscopy. To our knowledge, this is the first study that compares distance from the monitor to the endoscopist on polyp detection rate. METHODS: This was a retrospective study comparing polyp detection rate across two different endoscopy room set-ups. All colonoscopies performed between December 2013 and November 2014 were retrieved. The difference in the room set-up was the distance from the endoscopist to the endoscopy monitor. Room A had a distance of 219 cm and Room B had 147 cm. We used two identical rooms, C and D, as a control arm with a distance of 190 cm between the endoscopist and the monitor. RESULTS: There were significant differences in polyp detection rates between Room A and Room B in the bowel cancer screening lists. For these lists, the room with the closest distance from the endoscopist to the monitor (147 cm) had a statistically significant higher polyp detection rate than the room that had a further monitor to endoscopist distance of 219 cm (p<0.0006) and a trend towards a higher polyp detection rate compared with the room where the distance between the monitor and the endoscopist was 190 cm (p=0.08). This effect was not noticed across the service lists. CONCLUSIONS: This study has suggested that the distance from the endoscopist to the monitor can affect polyp detection rate. It appears that for bowel cancer screening lists, the further the endoscopist from the monitor the lower their polyp detection rate.

Does the Internet promote the unregulated use of fecal microbiota transplantation: a potential public health issue?

INTRODUCTION: The Internet has become an increasingly popular resource for medical information. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has changed the treatment of Clostridium difficile with cure rates of 81% following one infusion of FMT, further studies have since validated these findings. The Medicines and Health care Products Regulatory Agency has classified FMT as a medicine and hence should be only utilized in strict clinical settings. METHODS: We searched Facebook, Twitter, Google, and YouTube using the words "Faecal Microbiota Transplantation" and "FMT". We utilized the first 50 hits on each site. We analyzed the percentage of articles that fell outside regulated medical practice. We searched how many clinics in the UK advertised practice that falls outside suggested guidelines. RESULTS: Google, YouTube, and Facebook had a variety of information regarding FMT available. Nine out of 50 (18%) of the top 50 google searches can be considered articles that fall outside regulated practice. YouTube highlighted four videos describing how to self-administer FMT, one of these was for ulcerative colitis. Fourteen percent of the top 50 YouTube videos fall outside regulated practice and 8% of the top 50 Facebook searches fall outside regulated clinical practice. There were two clinics in the UK advertising FMT for uses that fall outside regulated practice. CONCLUSION: Clinicians and patients need to be aware of the resources available through social media and the Internet. It should be appreciated that some websites fall outside regulated clinical practice. Private clinics offering FMT need to ensure that they are offering FMT within a regulated framework.