Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.32
G. Gebeyehu, L. Flain, Rachael Slater, A. Frau, C. Probert, U. Ijaz, E. Pablo-Fernández, T. Warner
two groups of solid phase micro-extraction gas chromatography mass spectrometry. DNA was extracted from a subset of 24 PD and 20 control samples: 18S rRNA gene amplicons were prepared and sequenced using an Illumina MiSeq plat-form. Metabolomics and mycobiome statistical analysis were carried out using Metaboanalyst and R respectively. The R package mixOmics was used for integrated omics analysis in this subset.
{"title":"OWE-1 Investigation of the metabolome and mycobiome in Parkinson’s disease","authors":"G. Gebeyehu, L. Flain, Rachael Slater, A. Frau, C. Probert, U. Ijaz, E. Pablo-Fernández, T. Warner","doi":"10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.32","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.32","url":null,"abstract":"two groups of solid phase micro-extraction gas chromatography mass spectrometry. DNA was extracted from a subset of 24 PD and 20 control samples: 18S rRNA gene amplicons were prepared and sequenced using an Illumina MiSeq plat-form. Metabolomics and mycobiome statistical analysis were carried out using Metaboanalyst and R respectively. The R package mixOmics was used for integrated omics analysis in this subset.","PeriodicalId":19616,"journal":{"name":"Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81631795","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.34
Charlotte E Rutter, C. Phillips, Darin Nagamootoo, Simon O’Hare, N. Newbery, N. Trudgill
IntroductionBritish Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Workforce reports have identified widespread consultant vacancies, excessive workloads and insufficient training posts to meet current and future service demand. The COVID-19 pandemic has put further strain on an already overstretched and often demoralised workforce.MethodsThe Medical Workforce Unit of the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) undertakes an annual census of consultants each October. Data for gastroenterologists and hepatologists from the 2019 census, January 2020 RCP consultant wellbeing survey and the General Medicine Council (GMC) between 2012 and 2020 were examined.ResultsThe number of UK licensed gastroenterologists increased from 1,703 to 2,013 from 2014 to 2019. However, in recent years, fewer gastroenterologists have joined the GMC register annually (151 in 2014 and 115 in 2018). Consequently, 45% of advertised consultant posts in gastroenterology were unfilled and 8% of all posts filled by a locum in 2019, mostly due to a lack of applicants, with demand outstripping supply. There has also been a smaller increase (9% versus 14%) in gastroenterology trainee numbers compared to other medical specialties between 2012 and 2020. The average number of population per full time equivalent gastroenterologist in the UK is 43,913 but there are significant regional variations with some regions much more poorly served (Thames Valley 63,456, North Wales 59,444, Kent, Surrey and Sussex 50.974, and East of England 50,487).Gastroenterologists work a mean of 1PA unpaid in addition to contracted PAs. This leads to gastroenterologists saying they always, or most of the time in 59% work excessive hours and in 61% have an excessive workload. Gastroenterology is the major specialty at highest risk of burnout with lower (worse) mean mental wellbeing scores. Consequently, 51% of gastroenterologists reported that work affected their relationship with their partner and 53% with their children in the past year. 52% described their morale in 2019 as being worse than in 2018. 18% of gastroenterologists reported feeling bullied or harassment over the past year by managers or fellow consultants. Despite these issues, 87% of gastroenterologists reported they were always or often satisfied with specialty work, but only 21% with general internal medicine work.ConclusionsUnfilled consultant vacancies, high workloads, low wellbeing scores and morale were evident in gastroenterology and hepatology even before the COVID-19 pandemic. Gastroenterology is the major medical specialty at highest risk of burnout. At a time when the NHS workforce is under increasing pressure, these issues must be urgently addressed to improve the working lives of gastroenterologists and hepatologists.
{"title":"OTH-3 The state of the gastroenterology and hepatology consultant workforce in 2020","authors":"Charlotte E Rutter, C. Phillips, Darin Nagamootoo, Simon O’Hare, N. Newbery, N. Trudgill","doi":"10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.34","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.34","url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionBritish Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Workforce reports have identified widespread consultant vacancies, excessive workloads and insufficient training posts to meet current and future service demand. The COVID-19 pandemic has put further strain on an already overstretched and often demoralised workforce.MethodsThe Medical Workforce Unit of the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) undertakes an annual census of consultants each October. Data for gastroenterologists and hepatologists from the 2019 census, January 2020 RCP consultant wellbeing survey and the General Medicine Council (GMC) between 2012 and 2020 were examined.ResultsThe number of UK licensed gastroenterologists increased from 1,703 to 2,013 from 2014 to 2019. However, in recent years, fewer gastroenterologists have joined the GMC register annually (151 in 2014 and 115 in 2018). Consequently, 45% of advertised consultant posts in gastroenterology were unfilled and 8% of all posts filled by a locum in 2019, mostly due to a lack of applicants, with demand outstripping supply. There has also been a smaller increase (9% versus 14%) in gastroenterology trainee numbers compared to other medical specialties between 2012 and 2020. The average number of population per full time equivalent gastroenterologist in the UK is 43,913 but there are significant regional variations with some regions much more poorly served (Thames Valley 63,456, North Wales 59,444, Kent, Surrey and Sussex 50.974, and East of England 50,487).Gastroenterologists work a mean of 1PA unpaid in addition to contracted PAs. This leads to gastroenterologists saying they always, or most of the time in 59% work excessive hours and in 61% have an excessive workload. Gastroenterology is the major specialty at highest risk of burnout with lower (worse) mean mental wellbeing scores. Consequently, 51% of gastroenterologists reported that work affected their relationship with their partner and 53% with their children in the past year. 52% described their morale in 2019 as being worse than in 2018. 18% of gastroenterologists reported feeling bullied or harassment over the past year by managers or fellow consultants. Despite these issues, 87% of gastroenterologists reported they were always or often satisfied with specialty work, but only 21% with general internal medicine work.ConclusionsUnfilled consultant vacancies, high workloads, low wellbeing scores and morale were evident in gastroenterology and hepatology even before the COVID-19 pandemic. Gastroenterology is the major medical specialty at highest risk of burnout. At a time when the NHS workforce is under increasing pressure, these issues must be urgently addressed to improve the working lives of gastroenterologists and hepatologists.","PeriodicalId":19616,"journal":{"name":"Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81912081","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.7
A. Adams, Vipin Gupta, W. Mohsen, T. Chapman, D. Subhaharan, P. Ramaswamy, V. Ahuja, S. Travis, J. Satsangi
{"title":"OFR-10 Admission model for intensification of therapy in acute severe colitis (ADMIT-ASC)","authors":"A. Adams, Vipin Gupta, W. Mohsen, T. Chapman, D. Subhaharan, P. Ramaswamy, V. Ahuja, S. Travis, J. Satsangi","doi":"10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.7","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19616,"journal":{"name":"Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90933933","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.4
Liya Lu, J. Catlow, R. Broughton, P. Rogers, L. Sharp, M. Rutter
{"title":"OTU-14 Colonoscopy polyp detection is lower at weekends: A national endoscopy database analysis","authors":"Liya Lu, J. Catlow, R. Broughton, P. Rogers, L. Sharp, M. Rutter","doi":"10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.4","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19616,"journal":{"name":"Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88584080","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.28
S. Esmaily, L. Gemmell, H. Leyland, N. Thompson, J. Leeds, C. Mountford
{"title":"OTH-11 Biliary complications on home parenteral nutrition: Experience of a regional referral centre for intestinal failure","authors":"S. Esmaily, L. Gemmell, H. Leyland, N. Thompson, J. Leeds, C. Mountford","doi":"10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.28","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.28","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19616,"journal":{"name":"Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics","volume":"2015 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86918555","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.33
R. Hubbard, N. Arebi, A. Brooks, Sara El-Kouli, F. Kiparissi, E. Mozdiak, Philip Smith, N. Zarate-Lopez, V. Garrick, P. Narula
OFR-1 Table 1Key findings YP HCP VC strengths Saved time 84% Saved money 78% Reduced travel 25% Improved access to healthcare 81% Useful appointment 87% Would like VC again 83% More efficient & convenient Don’t miss education/work Safer during COVID Spoke to YP directly 80% Saw more patients 23% More free admin time 23% Convenient Don’t always need clinic room VC barriers Poor WIFI Need extra appointment for investigations/to collect prescriptions Communication easier face to face Less private Patient had to come to hospital for tests post VC 77% Unable to speak to YP privately 69% Unable to contact patient 48% Information technology (I.T) problems 29% Difficulty arranging investigations 23% Suggested improvements Improve I.T Use video not phone Prefer face to face Improve I.T 86% Have YP present for VC Ability to speak to YP alone Having results ready and easily accessible Improved pathways for requesting tests ConclusionsOverall respondents were satisfied with VC and felt they were useful, convenient and saved time.The surveys highlighted that improved I.T for both staff and patients is vital. In addition, improved processes for requesting investigations, prescriptions and accessing results would minimise admin time for staff and extra appointments for patients.Direct engagement and privacy with YP was reported to be more difficult with VC, which is an important consideration in developmentally appropriate transitional healthcare. Some YP felt more comfortable discussing personal or complex issues face to face with a HCP that they knew.It is important to recognise patient preference for face to face or virtual clinics and personalise care accordingly, acknowledging that this may alter with time and circumstance.Successful virtual consultations rely on appropriate patient selection and availability of reliable WIFI and IT. Patient preference is key and this may alter with time.
{"title":"OFR-1 Young persons and health care professionals experience of virtual gastroenterology consultations – a multicentre survey","authors":"R. Hubbard, N. Arebi, A. Brooks, Sara El-Kouli, F. Kiparissi, E. Mozdiak, Philip Smith, N. Zarate-Lopez, V. Garrick, P. Narula","doi":"10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.33","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.33","url":null,"abstract":"OFR-1 Table 1Key findings YP HCP VC strengths Saved time 84% Saved money 78% Reduced travel 25% Improved access to healthcare 81% Useful appointment 87% Would like VC again 83% More efficient & convenient Don’t miss education/work Safer during COVID Spoke to YP directly 80% Saw more patients 23% More free admin time 23% Convenient Don’t always need clinic room VC barriers Poor WIFI Need extra appointment for investigations/to collect prescriptions Communication easier face to face Less private Patient had to come to hospital for tests post VC 77% Unable to speak to YP privately 69% Unable to contact patient 48% Information technology (I.T) problems 29% Difficulty arranging investigations 23% Suggested improvements Improve I.T Use video not phone Prefer face to face Improve I.T 86% Have YP present for VC Ability to speak to YP alone Having results ready and easily accessible Improved pathways for requesting tests ConclusionsOverall respondents were satisfied with VC and felt they were useful, convenient and saved time.The surveys highlighted that improved I.T for both staff and patients is vital. In addition, improved processes for requesting investigations, prescriptions and accessing results would minimise admin time for staff and extra appointments for patients.Direct engagement and privacy with YP was reported to be more difficult with VC, which is an important consideration in developmentally appropriate transitional healthcare. Some YP felt more comfortable discussing personal or complex issues face to face with a HCP that they knew.It is important to recognise patient preference for face to face or virtual clinics and personalise care accordingly, acknowledging that this may alter with time and circumstance.Successful virtual consultations rely on appropriate patient selection and availability of reliable WIFI and IT. Patient preference is key and this may alter with time.","PeriodicalId":19616,"journal":{"name":"Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87624249","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.37
Elizabeth Ratcliffe, Rebecca Harris, S. Raju, C. Cook, Philip D. Harvey
IntroductionThe impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted training during the initial peak and partial recovery. Gastroenterology higher speciality training (HST) is reaching an inflection point with a reduction from five years to four. The potential compound impact is a source of concern for HSTs. The BSG Trainees Section biennial survey 2020 aimed to delineate the impact of COVID-19 and opinions on changes to training.MethodsAn electronic survey allowing for anonymised responses at the point of completion was distributed to all gastroenterology HSTs over a three month period from September to November 2020.ResultsIn total, 349 trainees completed the survey (response rate of 51% of 687 HSTs) with representation across all regions. 89%(307/344) of responders were full time trainees and 39%(136/349) female. There was a reduction in access to clinics;48.4%(169/349) reported due to general internal medicine (GIM) duties and 26.6% (93/349) due to reduction in available clinics. Reduction in experience in gastroenterology referrals were also mainly limited by GIM commitments (42.4%) (148/349). No endoscopy training occurred for 88.5(170/192)% of trainees at the peak. Recovery of training lists was reported by 67.3(175/260)% of responders in late summer yet 20.6(72/349)% reported training lists were still ‘not allowed’ in their trust. 71.0 (206/290)% of responders reported their time was predominantly taken by GIM, with 42.1 (110/261)% considering the need to extend their CCT date to compensate for this. 49.0%(128/261) of respondents were considering time out of programme or fellowships and 28.3 (74/261)% considering it in the future. The majority of responders reported virtual or online teaching was provided during the peak of the pandemic.Considering future training;96.8%(245/253) of respondents stated gastroenterology HSTs should have 1 year experience on a GI bleed rota, however only 21.3 (55/258)% reported having experience of this formally during training. 68.8%(174/253) of responders supported the idea of blocks of GIM training during HST to protect gastroenterology training. The majority of trainees (84.2%)(213/253) reported they would not feel ready to be a consultant after 4 years of HST. 46.7(122/261)% of responders would stop GIM training if given the opportunity.ConclusionsIn all aspects of gastroenterology training surveyed, more than half of training time was lost during the pandemic. This included training beyond endoscopy to other aspects of GI work including clinics and referrals. This is mirrored in anticipated concerns about completion of training and the perceived future competence as a consultant at the end of a 4 year higher training programme. Work is now required to ensure training trajectories are restored following the COVID-19 pandemic.
{"title":"OTU-15 BSG trainees section survey 2020 – the impact of COVID-19 on UK gastroenterology training","authors":"Elizabeth Ratcliffe, Rebecca Harris, S. Raju, C. Cook, Philip D. Harvey","doi":"10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.37","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.37","url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionThe impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted training during the initial peak and partial recovery. Gastroenterology higher speciality training (HST) is reaching an inflection point with a reduction from five years to four. The potential compound impact is a source of concern for HSTs. The BSG Trainees Section biennial survey 2020 aimed to delineate the impact of COVID-19 and opinions on changes to training.MethodsAn electronic survey allowing for anonymised responses at the point of completion was distributed to all gastroenterology HSTs over a three month period from September to November 2020.ResultsIn total, 349 trainees completed the survey (response rate of 51% of 687 HSTs) with representation across all regions. 89%(307/344) of responders were full time trainees and 39%(136/349) female. There was a reduction in access to clinics;48.4%(169/349) reported due to general internal medicine (GIM) duties and 26.6% (93/349) due to reduction in available clinics. Reduction in experience in gastroenterology referrals were also mainly limited by GIM commitments (42.4%) (148/349). No endoscopy training occurred for 88.5(170/192)% of trainees at the peak. Recovery of training lists was reported by 67.3(175/260)% of responders in late summer yet 20.6(72/349)% reported training lists were still ‘not allowed’ in their trust. 71.0 (206/290)% of responders reported their time was predominantly taken by GIM, with 42.1 (110/261)% considering the need to extend their CCT date to compensate for this. 49.0%(128/261) of respondents were considering time out of programme or fellowships and 28.3 (74/261)% considering it in the future. The majority of responders reported virtual or online teaching was provided during the peak of the pandemic.Considering future training;96.8%(245/253) of respondents stated gastroenterology HSTs should have 1 year experience on a GI bleed rota, however only 21.3 (55/258)% reported having experience of this formally during training. 68.8%(174/253) of responders supported the idea of blocks of GIM training during HST to protect gastroenterology training. The majority of trainees (84.2%)(213/253) reported they would not feel ready to be a consultant after 4 years of HST. 46.7(122/261)% of responders would stop GIM training if given the opportunity.ConclusionsIn all aspects of gastroenterology training surveyed, more than half of training time was lost during the pandemic. This included training beyond endoscopy to other aspects of GI work including clinics and referrals. This is mirrored in anticipated concerns about completion of training and the perceived future competence as a consultant at the end of a 4 year higher training programme. Work is now required to ensure training trajectories are restored following the COVID-19 pandemic.","PeriodicalId":19616,"journal":{"name":"Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics","volume":"76 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86735100","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.9
Ben Morison, L. Peyrin-Biroulet, I. Dotan, T. Hibi, V. Taliadouros, A. Oortwijn, Sally Zhao, J Zhang, J. Hsieh, B. Feagan
{"title":"OMO-2 Filgotinib efficacy in patients with ulcerative colitis by line of therapy: Phase 2b/3 selection results","authors":"Ben Morison, L. Peyrin-Biroulet, I. Dotan, T. Hibi, V. Taliadouros, A. Oortwijn, Sally Zhao, J Zhang, J. Hsieh, B. Feagan","doi":"10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.9","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19616,"journal":{"name":"Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75240477","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.36
A. Prentice, Ghalia Kayal, S. Marshall, C. Wagner, R. Kerrison
IntroductionAt the start of the covid-19 pandemic, many invasive diagnostic tests had to be stopped to avoid patients catching covid-19 as a result of attending hospital. Several procedures to reduce COVID transmission have been implemented as services resumed (e.g. COVID testing). Despite this, some patients may still experience what is now called ‘COVID anxiety’. The aim of this study was to monitor satisfaction with covid mitigation measures and anxiety among patients attending colonoscopy following an abnormal screening result.MethodsWe surveyed patients who were invited for colonoscopy at St Mark’s Hospital between July 2020 and May 2021. Data on anxiety and worry were collected, 3 days before and after colonoscopy;scales ranged from 6-24 for general anxiety, 0-20 for COVID-anxiety and 1-4 for bowel cancer worry (with higher scores representing greater anxiety for all three measures). Descriptive statistics were used to assess mean pre- and post-procedure anxiety scores. Inferential statistics were used to test for differences in anxiety, before and after colonoscopy. All analyses were performed using SPSS (Ver 27.0).Results205 patients (mean age 67 years;114 males, 91 females;121 White, 55, South Asian, 27 any other ethnicity;142 English first language speakers) completed the pre-procedure questionnaire and were enrolled into the study. 89 (43.4%) completed the post-procedure questionnaire and were analysed.Pre- procedure, mean general anxiety, COVID-anxiety, and bowel cancer worry scores were 10.94, 0.93 and 1.95, respectively. Post-procedure, the general anxiety, COVID-anxiety and bowel cancer worry scores were 8.92, 1.03 and 2.11, respectively. The change in general anxiety (-2.02) was statistically significant (p=0.015), while the changes in COVID anxiety (+0.1) and bowel cancer worry (+0.16) were not (both ps<0.05).Significant reductions in general anxiety were observed for women (pre- and post-procedure general anxiety scores were: 13.05 vs. 8.33, respectively;p<0.001), White British adults (pre- and post-procedure general anxiety scores were: 11.47 and 8.90, respectively;p<0.001) and adults whose first language was English (pre- and post-procedure general anxiety scores were: 11.49 and 9.08, respectively;p<0.001).The majority of patients were highly satisfied with the covid-measures put in place. There was no association between satisfaction and changes in COVID Anxiety (p<0.05).ConclusionsCOVID anxiety was low among people who attended colonoscopy. General anxiety, however, was moderate, although it was reduced following the procedure. General anxiety was not reduced for some groups, including those whose first language is not English, highlighting the need for further research into factors affecting experience in these groups.
{"title":"OTH-8 Patient reported anxiety, before and after colonoscopy, during the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"A. Prentice, Ghalia Kayal, S. Marshall, C. Wagner, R. Kerrison","doi":"10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.36","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.36","url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionAt the start of the covid-19 pandemic, many invasive diagnostic tests had to be stopped to avoid patients catching covid-19 as a result of attending hospital. Several procedures to reduce COVID transmission have been implemented as services resumed (e.g. COVID testing). Despite this, some patients may still experience what is now called ‘COVID anxiety’. The aim of this study was to monitor satisfaction with covid mitigation measures and anxiety among patients attending colonoscopy following an abnormal screening result.MethodsWe surveyed patients who were invited for colonoscopy at St Mark’s Hospital between July 2020 and May 2021. Data on anxiety and worry were collected, 3 days before and after colonoscopy;scales ranged from 6-24 for general anxiety, 0-20 for COVID-anxiety and 1-4 for bowel cancer worry (with higher scores representing greater anxiety for all three measures). Descriptive statistics were used to assess mean pre- and post-procedure anxiety scores. Inferential statistics were used to test for differences in anxiety, before and after colonoscopy. All analyses were performed using SPSS (Ver 27.0).Results205 patients (mean age 67 years;114 males, 91 females;121 White, 55, South Asian, 27 any other ethnicity;142 English first language speakers) completed the pre-procedure questionnaire and were enrolled into the study. 89 (43.4%) completed the post-procedure questionnaire and were analysed.Pre- procedure, mean general anxiety, COVID-anxiety, and bowel cancer worry scores were 10.94, 0.93 and 1.95, respectively. Post-procedure, the general anxiety, COVID-anxiety and bowel cancer worry scores were 8.92, 1.03 and 2.11, respectively. The change in general anxiety (-2.02) was statistically significant (p=0.015), while the changes in COVID anxiety (+0.1) and bowel cancer worry (+0.16) were not (both ps<0.05).Significant reductions in general anxiety were observed for women (pre- and post-procedure general anxiety scores were: 13.05 vs. 8.33, respectively;p<0.001), White British adults (pre- and post-procedure general anxiety scores were: 11.47 and 8.90, respectively;p<0.001) and adults whose first language was English (pre- and post-procedure general anxiety scores were: 11.49 and 9.08, respectively;p<0.001).The majority of patients were highly satisfied with the covid-measures put in place. There was no association between satisfaction and changes in COVID Anxiety (p<0.05).ConclusionsCOVID anxiety was low among people who attended colonoscopy. General anxiety, however, was moderate, although it was reduced following the procedure. General anxiety was not reduced for some groups, including those whose first language is not English, highlighting the need for further research into factors affecting experience in these groups.","PeriodicalId":19616,"journal":{"name":"Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78801104","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.17
P. Dunne, P. Hayes, D. Tripathi, J. Leithead, L. Smith, D. Gaya, E. Forrest, A. Stanley
{"title":"OWE-5 Carvedilol vs. endoscopic band ligation for variceal bleeding secondary prophylaxis; long-term RCT follow-up","authors":"P. Dunne, P. Hayes, D. Tripathi, J. Leithead, L. Smith, D. Gaya, E. Forrest, A. Stanley","doi":"10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-bsg.17","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19616,"journal":{"name":"Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90909873","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：