A Nationwide Survey of Gastroenterology Program Leadership Regarding Implementation of the GI Hospitalist Model.

BACKGROUND: Academic gastroenterology (GI) hospitalists are increasing, however the impacts on fellowship training and clinical care are unclear. Motivations for implementation of the GI hospitalist model are uninvestigated. AIMS: We aimed to determine the prevalence of GI hospitalists, explore motivations for and against adoption of a GIH model, and investigate the model's effects on fellowship training. METHODS: Leadership at current general GI fellowships were surveyed about current staffing models, as well as effects and perceptions of the hospitalist model. RESULTS: There was a total of 52 (26%) respondents and 12 (23%) reported having a GI hospitalist at their institution. A majority of respondents stated burnout and reduced time on service for other faculty was a primary reason for hiring a GI hospitalist. DISCUSSION: The largest perceived benefit of a hospitalist is reduced burnout and time on service for outpatient GI faculty. Many respondents also believed a GIH would improve fellowship education and quality of inpatient care.

Clinicopathologic and genetic characteristics of interval colorectal carcinomas favor origin from missed or incompletely excised precursors.

Interval colorectal cancers may arise from missed or incompletely excised precursors or from a unique rapid progression pathway. We compared the clinicopathologic and molecular profiles of interval and matched non-interval colorectal cancer to determine whether interval colorectal cancers harbor any unique genetic characteristics. Fifty one of 982 colorectal cancer (5.2%) were categorized as interval colorectal cancer, defined as colorectal cancer detected in a diagnostic examination prior to the next recommended colonoscopy and at least 1 year after the last colonoscopy. Clinicopathologic characteristics of interval colorectal cancer were compared to non-interval colorectal cancer matched 1:1 on age, gender, and tumor location. Molecular profile of a subset of interval colorectal cancer (n = 20) and matched (1:2) non-interval colorectal cancer (n = 40) were evaluated using next generation sequencing. Interval colorectal cancer were more likely to occur in the right colon (55% vs. 35%; p = 0.02) and in patients > 70 years of age (55% vs. 34%; p = 0.002). Clinicopathologic features and aberrant DNA mismatch repair protein expression were not significantly different between interval and matched non-interval colorectal cancer. The frequency and spectrum of genetic alterations was also similar in interval and matched non-interval colorectal cancer. Similar findings were seen when analysis was restricted to interval colorectal cancer diagnosed <5 years after last colonoscopy (n = 42). Interval and non-interval colorectal cancers share similar clinicopathologic and genetic profiles when matched for tumor location. Interval colorectal cancers and are more likely to develop from missed or incompletely excised precursors rather than a unique rapid progression pathway.

The SAFE-T assessment tool: derivation and validation of a web-based application for point-of-care evaluation of gastroenterology fellow performance in colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Attending assessment is a critical part of endoscopic education for gastroenterology fellows. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a concise assessment tool to evaluate real-time fellow performance in colonoscopy administered via a web-based application. METHODS: The Skill Assessment in Fellow Endoscopy Training (SAFE-T) tool was derived as a novel 5-question evaluation tool that captures both summative and formative feedback adapted into a web-based application. A prospective study of 15 gastroenterology fellows (5 fellows each from years 1 to 3 of training) was performed using the SAFE-T tool. An independent reviewer evaluated a subset of these procedures and completed the SAFE-T tool and Mayo Colonoscopy Skills Assessment Tool (MCSAT) for reliability testing. RESULTS: Twenty-six faculty completed 350 SAFE-T evaluations of the 15 fellows in the study. The mean SAFE-T overall score (year 1, 2.00; year 2, 3.84; year 3, 4.28) differentiated each sequential fellow year of training (P < .0001). The mean SAFE-T overall score decreased with increasing case complexity score, with straightforward cases compared with average cases (4.07 vs 3.50, P < .0001), and average cases compared with challenging cases (3.50 vs 3.08, P = .0134). In dual-observed procedures, the SAFE-T tool showed excellent inter-rater reliability with a kappa agreement statistic of 0.898 (P < .0001). Correlation of the SAFE-T overall score with the MCSAT overall hands-on and individual motor scores was excellent (each r > 0.90, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated the SAFE-T assessment tool, a concise and web-based means of assessing real-time gastroenterology fellow performance in colonoscopy.

Impact of physician compliance with colonoscopy surveillance guidelines on interval colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Interval colorectal cancer (iCRC) incidence is the criterion standard benchmark for measuring the effectiveness of colonoscopy. Colonoscopy surveillance guidelines are designed to minimize iCRC cases. Our aims were to describe characteristics of iCRC patients and to assess whether development of iCRC is related to colonoscopy surveillance guideline intervals. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of postcolonoscopy iCRC cases in a large healthcare system. Guideline-based colonoscopy intervals were calculated based on the 2012 U.S. Multi-Society Task Force for Colorectal Cancer colonoscopy surveillance guidelines. Backward stepwise linear regression was used to determine predictors of iCRC before guideline-recommended follow-up intervals. RESULTS: We identified 245 iCRC cases (mean age, 69.4 years; 56.3% male) out of 5345 colon cancers evaluated for a prevalence of 4.60%. On index colonoscopy, 75.1% had an adequate preparation, 93.0% reached the cecum, and 52.5% had polyps. iCRC developed before the guideline-recommended interval in 59.1% of patients (94/159). Independent predictive factors of this finding were inadequate preparation (OR, .012; 95% CI, .003-.06; P < .0001) and ≥3 polyps on index colonoscopy (OR, .2; 95% CI, .078-.52; P = .0009). An endoscopist-recommended follow-up interval past the guideline-recommended interval was seen in 23.9% of cases (38/159). Most (34/38, 89.5%) of these iCRCs had inadequate preparation and were diagnosed after the guideline-based follow-up interval. CONCLUSIONS: Current colonoscopy surveillance guidelines may be inadequate to prevent many iCRC cases. Physician noncompliance with guideline-based surveillance intervals may increase in iCRC cases, especially in patients with an initially inadequate bowel preparation.

Perceptions of the Inpatient Training Experience: A Nationwide Survey of Gastroenterology Program Directors and Fellows.

BACKGROUND: Inpatient training is a key component of gastroenterology (GI) fellowship programs nationwide, yet little is known about perceptions of the inpatient training experience. AIM: To compare the content, objectives and quality of the inpatient training experience as perceived by program directors (PD) and fellows in US ACGME-accredited GI fellowship programs. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide, online-based survey of GI PDs and fellows at the conclusion of the 2016 academic year. We queried participants about (1) the current models of inpatient training, (2) the content, objectives, and quality of the inpatient training experience, and (3) the frequency and quality of educational activities on the inpatient service. We analyzed five-point Likert items and rank assessments as continuous variables by an independent t test and compared proportions using the Chi-square test. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 48.4% (75/155) for PDs and a total of 194 fellows completed the survey, with both groups reporting the general GI consult team (>90%) as the primary model of inpatient training. PDs and fellows agreed on the ranking of all queried responsibilities of the inpatient fellow to develop during the inpatient service. However, fellows indicated that attendings spent less time teaching and provided less formal feedback than that perceived by PDs (p < 0.0001). PDs rated the overall quality of the inpatient training experience (p < 0.0001) and education on the wards (p = 0.0003) as better than overall ratings by fellows. CONCLUSION: Although GI fellows and PDs agree on the importance of specific fellow responsibilities on the inpatient service, fellows report experiencing less teaching and feedback from attendings than that perceived by PDs. Committing more time to education and assessment may improve fellows' perceptions of the inpatient training experience.

Racial and ethnic variations in the effects of family history of colorectal cancer on screening compliance.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Individuals with a family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) have a higher risk of developing CRC than the general population, and studies have shown that they are more likely to undergo CRC screening. We assessed the overall and race- and ethnicity-specific effects of a family history of CRC on screening. METHODS: We analyzed data from the 2009 California Health Interview Survey to estimate overall and race- and ethnicity-specific odds ratios (ORs) for the association between family history of CRC and CRC screening. RESULTS: The unweighted and weighted sample sizes were 23,837 and 8,851,003, respectively. Individuals with a family history of CRC were more likely to participate in any form of screening (OR, 2.3; 95% confidence limit [CL], 1.7, 3.1) and in colonoscopy screening (OR, 2.7; 95% CL, 2.2, 3.4) than those without a family history, but this association varied among racial and ethnic groups. The magnitude of the association between family history and colonoscopy screening was highest among Asians (OR, 6.1; 95% CL, 3.1, 11.9), lowest among Hispanics (OR, 1.4; 95% CL, 0.67, 2.8), and comparable between non-Hispanic whites (OR, 3.1; 95% CL, 2.6, 3.8) and non-Hispanic blacks (OR 2.6; 95% CL, 1.2, 5.7) (P for interaction < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of family history of CRC on participation in screening vary among racial and ethnic groups, and have the lowest effects on Hispanics, compared with other groups. Consequently, interventions to promote CRC screening among Hispanics with a family history should be considered.

A Novel Multidisciplinary Team Activation for Patients with Severe Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Creation of the Code GI Bleed Protocol.

Patients with gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding present to the emergency department (ED) with a wide spectrum of illness severity. Among the most critically ill patients, comorbidities and other risk factors, such as liver disease and anticoagulation, can complicate their management. These patients are resource-intensive to stabilize and resuscitate, often requiring the continuous attention of multiple ED staff members along with rapid mobilization of specialty care. At a tertiary care hospital with the ability to provide definitive care for the most critically ill patients with GI bleeding, we introduced a multi-disciplinary team activation pathway to bring together specialists to immediately respond to the ED. We designed a Code GI Bleed pathway to expedite hemodynamic stabilization, diagnostics, source control, and timely disposition out of the ED to the intensive care unit or relevant procedural area of the hospital.

The SAFE-T upper endoscopy tool: a web-based application for the point-of-care evaluation of gastroenterology fellow performance in upper endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Attending assessment is a critical part of endoscopic education for gastroenterology fellows. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a concise, web-based assessment tool to evaluate real-time fellow performance in upper endoscopy. METHODS: We developed the Skill Assessment in Fellow Endoscopy Training (SAFE-T) upper endoscopy tool to capture both summative and formative feedback in a concise, five-part questionnaire. The tool mirrors the previously validated SAFE-T colonoscopy tool and is administered electronically via a web-based application. We evaluated the tool in a prospective study of 15 gastroenterology fellows (5 fellows each from Years 1-3 of training) over the 2018-2019 academic year. An independent reviewer evaluated a subset of these procedures and completed both the SAFE-T and Assessment of Competency in Endoscopy (ACE) upper endoscopy forms for reliability testing. RESULTS: Twenty faculty completed 413 SAFE-T evaluations of the 15 fellows in the study. The mean SAFE-T overall score differentiated each sequential fellow year of training, with first-year cases having lower performance than second-year cases (3.31 vs 4.25, P < 0.001) and second-year cases having lower performance than third-year cases (4.25 vs 4.56, P < 0.001). The mean SAFE-T overall score decreased with increasing case-complexity score, with straightforward compared with average cases (3.98 vs 3.39, P < 0.001) and average compared with challenging cases (3.39 vs 2.84, P = 0.042). In dual-observed procedures, the SAFE-T tool showed excellent inter-rater reliability with a Kappa agreement statistic of 0.815 (P = 0.001). The SAFE-T overall score also highly correlated with the ACE upper endoscopy overall hands-on score (r = 0.76, P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated the SAFE-T upper endoscopy tool-a concise and web-based means of assessing real-time gastroenterology fellow performance in upper endoscopy.

Use of antibiotics in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease.

An increasing amount of evidence suggests that enteric flora may have a role in the pathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Patients with IBD appear to have an altered composition of luminal bacteria that may provide the stimulus for the chronic inflammation characterizing IBD. The suspected role of bacteria in the pathogenesis of IBD provides the rationale for using agents, such as antibiotics, that alter the intestinal flora. However, there remains much uncertainty about the optimal use of antibiotics in the treatment of Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, and pouchitis. This article reviews the literature and presents a clinical model for the use of antibiotics in IBD.

Incidence and predictors of microbiology results returning postdischarge and requiring follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Failure to follow up microbiology results pending at discharge can delay appropriate treatment, increasing the risk of patient harm and litigation. Limited data describe the frequency of postdischarge microbiology results requiring a treatment change. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence and predictors of postdischarge microbiology results requiring follow-up. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Large academic hospital during 2007. MEASUREMENTS: We evaluated blood, urine, sputum, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cultures ordered for hospitalized patients. We identified cultures that returned postdischarge and determined which were clinically important and not treated by an antibiotic to which they were susceptible. We reviewed a random subset to assess the potential need for antibiotic change. Using logistic regression, we identified significant predictors of results requiring follow-up. RESULTS: Of 77,349 inpatient culture results, 8668 (11%) returned postdischarge. Of these, 385 (4%) were clinically important and untreated at discharge. Among 94 manually reviewed cases, 53% potentially required a change in therapy. Urine cultures were more likely to potentially require therapy change than non-urine cultures (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.1-7.2; P = 0.03). Also, 76% of 25 results from surgical services potentially required a therapy change, compared with 59% of 29 results from general medicine, 38% of 16 results from oncology, and 33% of 24 results from medical subspecialties. Overall, 2.4% of postdischarge cultures potentially necessitated an antibiotic change. CONCLUSIONS: Many microbiology results return postdischarge and some necessitate a change in treatment. These results arise from many specialties, suggesting the need for a hospital-wide system to ensure effective communication of these results.

Blood-based biomarkers can differentiate ulcerative colitis from Crohn's disease and noninflammatory diarrhea.

BACKGROUND: Blood gene expression profiling has been used in several studies to identify patients with a number of conditions and diseases. A blood test with the ability to differentiate Crohn's disease (CD) from ulcerative colitis (UC) and noninflammatory diarrhea would be useful in the clinical management of these diseases. METHODS: Affymetrix U133Plus 2.0 GeneChip oligonucleotide arrays were used to generate whole blood gene expression profiles for 21 patients with UC, 24 patients with CD, and 10 control patients with diarrhea, but without colonic pathology. RESULTS: A supervised learning method (logistic regression) was used to identify specific panels of probe sets which were able to discriminate between UC and CD and from controls. The UC panel consisted of the four genes, CD300A, KPNA4, IL1R2, and ELAVL1; the CD panel comprised the four genes CAP1, BID, NIT2, and NPL. These panels clearly differentiated between CD and UC. CONCLUSIONS: Gene expression profiles from blood can differentiate patients with CD from those with UC and from noninflammatory diarrheal disorders.