Endoscopy service – back on track between COVID-19 surges: a global evaluation | ||||
| Global Gastroenterology | ||||
| Volume 1, Issue 1, August 2023 PDF (1.65 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Articles | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/gg.2023.202914.1016 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Omar Elshaarawy1; Nha Le Ngoc Hoa 2; Pezhman Alavinejad 3; Radovan Prijic4; Saif Salman5; Quang Trung Tran6; Giulio Antonelli7; Michiel Bronswijk8; Katarzyna M. Pawlak9; Sang Hyub Lee10; Alejandro Piscoya 11; Tiago Cúrdia Gonçalves12; Hang Dao13; Kelvin Trong Nguyen14; Nitin Shanker Behl15; Zhiqin Wong16; Mingyan Cai17; Marcus Hollenbach18; Andrei Voiosu19
| ||||
| 1Department of Hepatology, Gastroenterology and Liver Transplantation, National Liver Institute, Menoufia University, Egypt. | ||||
| 2Gastroenterology Division, Internal Medicine and Haematology Department, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. | ||||
| 3Alimentary Tract Research Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital Clinical Research Development Unit, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran | ||||
| 4Endoscopy Unit, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Internal Medicine Department, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia | ||||
| 5The Hashemite University Faculty of Medicine, Zarqa, Jordan. | ||||
| 6Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy | ||||
| 7Endoscopy Unit, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome, Italy | ||||
| 8Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium. & Imelda General Hospital, Bonheiden, Belgium. | ||||
| 9Hospital of the Ministry of Interior and Administration, Department of Internal Medicine, Cardiology, Gastroenterology and Endocrinology, Szczecin, Poland. | ||||
| 10Department of Internal Medicine and Liver Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. | ||||
| 11Hospital Guillermo Kaelin de la Fuente, Lima, Peru | ||||
| 12Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital da Senhora da Oliveira, Guimar.es, Portugal. & Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), School of Medicine, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal. & ICVS/3B’s, PT Government | ||||
| 13Vice Director, Endoscopy Centre, Hanoi Medical University hospital | ||||
| 14Department of Gastroenterology, Kaiser Permanente of Orange County, California, United States | ||||
| 15Institute of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases, Fortis Hospitals, Ludhiana, India | ||||
| 16Gastroenterology and Hepatology Unit, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The National University of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia | ||||
| 17Endoscopy Centre and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital Fudan University, Shanghai, China | ||||
| 18Medical Department II — Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Infectious Diseases, Pulmonology, University of Leipzig Medical Centre, Leipzig, Germany | ||||
| 19Gastroenterology Division, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Introduction: An outbreak of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) has altered the dynamic of endoscopic practices. Many guidelines, questionnaires have been published addressing service resumption during the pandemic. Curious about the situation in different endoscopic units across the globe, the study was designed to evaluate different aspects of practice resumption worldwide and their adherence to guidelines. Methods: An online questionnaire was created and distributed by national/regional representatives and societies. Redcap® platform was used as the interface; afterwards, Microsoft Excel 2016 and Prism 5 were utilized for data analysis. Results: From a total of 307 responses from 47 countries/regions was collected, 290 valid answers were analyzed. Almost half (47%) were in post-peak period by August, 2020. Many units were not designated to be COVID-oriented facility. About 15.5% of centers remained unrecovered, mainly in North and South America; those were recovered, training was still withheld significantly. Nevertheless, opened centers kept safety measurements strictly. Patient load was decreased by 37%, but waiting list was increased 0-25%. Among many surveillance methods, body temperature, PCR and chest CT were the most common. 74.8% increased post-procedural disinfection time and 68.2% increase in per-case inspection were noted. PPE usage was implemented highly and shortage of these posed as one of the resumption barriers. Post-procedural patient surveillance was not reinforced. Conclusions: The study represented real-time global endoscopic service’s adaptation to COVID-19 pandemic. Previously published barriers upon practice resumption remained. Despite Delphi consensus’ emphasis on post-procedural surveillance, application was not widely reinforced, raising concerns in disease control. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Resuming; Barriers; Services; Pandemic | ||||
|
Supplementary Files
|
||||
|
Statistics Article View: 52 PDF Download: 36 |
||||
