The Impact of the Coronavirus Disease-19 Pandemic on Access to Endoscopy Procedures in the VA Healthcare System

Developing Evidence to Support Policy: Protocol for the StrAtegic PoLicy EvIdence-Based Evaluation CeNTer (SALIENT)

BACKGROUND

All federal agencies are required to support appropriation requests with evidence and evaluation (US Public Law 115-435; the Evidence Act). The StrAtegic PoLicy EvIdence-Based Evaluation CeNTer (SALIENT) is 1 of 6 centers that help the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) meet this requirement.

OBJECTIVE

Working with the existing VA evaluation structure, SALIENT evaluations will contribute to (1) optimize policies and programs for veteran populations; (2) improve outcomes regarding health, equity, cost, and provider well-being; (3) advance the science of dissemination and knowledge translation; and (4) expand the implementation and dissemination science workforce.

METHODS

We leverage the Lean Sprint methodology (iterative, incremental, rule-governed approach to clearly defined, and time-boxed work) and 3 cores to develop our evaluation plans collaboratively with operational partners and key stakeholders including veterans, policy experts, and clinicians. The Operations Core will work with evaluation teams to develop timelines, facilitate work, monitor progress, and guide quality improvement within SALIENT. The Methods Core will work with evaluation teams to identify the most appropriate qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches to address each evaluation, ensure that the analyses are conducted appropriately, and troubleshoot when problems with data acquisition and analysis arise. The Knowledge Translation (KT) Core will target key partners and decision makers using a needs-based market segmentation approach to ensure that needs are incorporated in the dissemination of knowledge. The KT Core will create communications briefs, playbooks, and other materials targeted at these market segments to facilitate implementation of evidence-based practices and maximize the impact of evaluation results.

RESULTS

The SALIENT team has developed a center infrastructure to support high-priority evaluations, often to be responsive to shifting operational needs and priorities. Our team has engaged in our core missions and operations to rapidly evaluate a high-priority areas, develop a comprehensive Lean Sprint systems redesign approach to training, and accelerate rapid knowledge translation.

CONCLUSIONS

With an array of interdisciplinary expertise, operational partnerships, and integrated resources, SALIENT has an established and evolving infrastructure to rapidly develop and implement high-impact evaluations. Projects are developed with sustained efficiency approaches that can pivot to new priorities as needed and effectively translate knowledge for key stakeholders and policy makers, while creating a learning health system infrastructure to foster the next generation of evaluation and implementation scientists.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/59830.

Resilience Gap in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Activity during the COVID-19 Pandemic in South Korea

This study assessed the impact of distancing measures during the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer diagnostic activities, including gastrointestinal endoscopy (GIE). It analyzed GIE volumes from 2020 to 2022 in comparison to 2018-2019, considering variations in resilience linked to socioeconomic status (SES). The analysis utilized data from the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Services database, covering the entire population and medical facilities. Diagnostic GIE rates (2018-2022) in Gwangju Metropolitan City and Jeonnam province were examined, comparing age-standardized rates (ASRs) by area, gender, and SES. The results indicated a decline in ASRs for colonoscopy and endoscopic gastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in 2020 compared to 2018-2019, followed by an increase in 2021-2022, except for EGD in the medical aid population. SES based and rural-urban disparities were evident in the recovery of GIE rates. The findings suggest that equity-focused strategies are needed to ensure equitable healthcare access among different socioeconomic groups after pandemic.

Automated Reminders Enhance Mailed Fecal Immunochemical Test Completion Among Veterans: a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The Veterans Affairs (VHA) is working to establish a population-based colorectal cancer screening program for average-risk patients using mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT). However, low response rates to mailed FIT may hinder success. Key features of mailed FIT programs, including the use of reminders, differ among various national programs, with limited evidence among veterans.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to test whether using reminders, either via telephone call or text message, was effective in improving mailed FIT response rates.

DESIGN

We conducted a prospective, randomized quality improvement trial ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05012007). Veterans who had not returned a FIT within 2 weeks of receiving the kit were randomized to one of three groups: (1) control (no reminder); (2) an automated telephone call reminder; or (3) an automated text message reminder.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 2658 veterans enrolled at VA Puget Sound Health Care System who were aged 45-75 and had an average risk of colorectal cancer.

INTERVENTIONS

A single automated telephone call or text message reminder prompting veterans to return the FIT kit.

MAIN MEASURES

Our primary outcome was FIT return at 90 days and our secondary outcome was FIT return at 180 days.

KEY RESULTS

Participant average age was 62 years, 88% were men, and 66% White. At 90 days, both the phone and text reminder interventions had higher FIT return rates compared to control (intention-to-treat results (ITT): control 28%, phone 39%, text 38%; p<0.001). At 180 days, FIT kit return remained higher in the reminder interventions (ITT: control 32%, phone 42%, text 40%; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Automated reminders increased colorectal cancer screening completion among average-risk veterans. An automated phone call or text message was equally effective. VHA facilities seeking to implement a mailed FIT program should consider using phone or text reminders, depending on available resources.

A Postcard Primer Prior to Mailed Fecal Immunochemical Test Among Veterans: a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) programs are increasingly utilized for population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Advanced notifications (primers) are one behavioral designed feature of many mailed FIT programs, but few have tested this feature among Veterans.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if an advanced notification, a primer postcard, increases completion of FIT among Veterans.

DESIGN

This is a prospective, randomized quality improvement trial to evaluate a postcard primer prior to a mailed FIT versus mailed FIT alone.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 2404 Veterans enrolled for care at a large VA site that were due for average-risk CRC screening.

INTERVENTION

A written postcard sent 2 weeks in advance of a mailed FIT kit that contained information on CRC screening and completing a FIT.

MAIN MEASURES

Our primary outcome was FIT completion at 90 days, and our secondary outcome was FIT completion at 180 days.

KEY RESULTS

Overall, unadjusted mailed FIT return rates were similar among control vs. primer arms at 90 days (27% vs. 29%, p = 0.11). Our adjusted analysis found a primer postcard did not increase FIT completion compared to mailed FIT alone (OR 1.14 (0.94, 1.37)).

CONCLUSIONS

Though primers are often a standard part of mailed FIT programs, we did not find an increase in FIT completion with mailed postcard primers among Veterans. Given the overall low mailed FIT return rates, testing different ways to improve return rates is essential to improving CRC screening.

Impacts of COVID-19 on Appropriate Use of Screening Colonoscopy in a Large Integrated Healthcare Delivery System

BACKGROUND

Decreasing low-value colonoscopy is critical to optimizing access for high-need patients, particularly in resource-constrained environments such as those created by the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that rates of screening colonoscopy overuse would decline during COVID compared to pre-COVID due to enhanced procedural scrutiny and prioritization in the setting of constrained access.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize impacts of COVID-19 on screening colonoscopy overuse DESIGN: Retrospective national cohort study using Veterans Health Administration administrative data PARTICIPANTS: Veterans undergoing screening colonoscopy in Q4 2019 (pre-COVID) and Q4 2020 (COVID) at 109 endoscopy facilities MAIN MEASURES: Rates of screening colonoscopy overuse KEY RESULTS: 18,376 screening colonoscopies were performed pre-COVID, 19% (3,641) of which met overuse criteria. While only 9,360 screening colonoscopies were performed in Q4 2020, 25% met overuse criteria. Overall change in median facility-level overuse during COVID compared to pre-COVID was 6% (95%CI 5%-7%), with significant variability across facilities (IQR: 2%-11%). Of colonoscopies meeting overuse criteria, the top reason for overuse in both periods was screening colonoscopy performed <9 years after previous screening procedure (55% pre-COVID, 49% during COVID). The largest shifts in overuse category were in screening procedures performed <9 years after prior screening colonoscopy (-6% decline COVID vs. pre-COVID) and screening procedures performed in patients below average-risk screening age (i.e., age <40 (5% increase COVID compared to pre-COVID), age 40-44 (4% increase COVID vs. pre-COVID)). Within facility performance was stable over time; 83/109 facilities changed their performance by <=1 quartile during COVID compared to pre-COVID.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite pandemic-related resource constraints and enhanced procedural scrutiny and prioritization in the setting of COVID-related backlogs, screening colonoscopy overuse rates remained roughly stable during COVID compared to pre-COVID, with continued variability across facilities. These data highlight the need for systematic and concerted efforts to address overuse, even in the face of strong external motivating factors.

Implementation of a mailed faecal immunochemical test programme for colorectal cancer screening among Veterans

Background

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) with faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is effective at reducing CRC mortality. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with deferred care, especially screening for CRC.

Aim

We sought to develop a mailed FIT programme (MFP) to increase CRC screening and make recommendations for adoption across the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and for other large healthcare systems.

Setting

2 regional VA medical centres in California and Washington state.

Participants

5667 average risk veterans aged 50–75 overdue or due within 90 days for CRC screening.

Programme description

A multidisciplinary implementation team collaborated to mail an FIT kit to eligible veterans. Both sites mailed a primer postcard, and one site added an automated reminder call.

Programme evaluation

We monitored FIT return and positivity rate, as well as impact of the programme on clinical staff. 34% of FIT kits were returned within 90 days and 7.8% were abnormal.

Discussion

We successfully implemented a population-based MFP at multiple regional VA sites and recommend that these efforts be spread across VA. Our model of regional leadership, facility champions and using centralised resources can be adaptable to other large healthcare systems. MFPs support catch-up from disrupted care by addressing access to CRC screening, unburden primary care visits and conserve limited procedural resources.

COVID-19 Pandemic Had Minimal Impact on Colonoscopy Completion After Colorectal Cancer Red Flag Sign or Symptoms in US Veterans

BACKGROUND

Delays in colonoscopy work-up for red flag signs or symptoms of colorectal cancer (CRC) during the COVID-19 pandemic are not well characterized.

AIMS

To examine colonoscopy uptake and time to colonoscopy after red flag diagnosis, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Cohort study of adults ages 50-75 with iron deficiency anemia (IDA), hematochezia, or abnormal stool blood test receiving Veterans Health Administration (VHA) care from April 2019 to December 2020. Index date was first red flag diagnosis date, categorized into "pre" (April-December 2019) and "intra" (April-December 2020) policy implementation prioritizing diagnostic procedures, allowing for a 3-month "washout" (January-March 2020) period. Outcomes were colonoscopy completion and time to colonoscopy pre- vs. intra-COVID-19, examined using multivariable Cox models with hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

There were 52,539 adults with red flag signs or symptoms (pre-COVID: 25,154; washout: 7527; intra-COVID: 19,858). Proportion completing colonoscopy was similar pre- vs. intra-COVID-19 (27.0% vs. 26.5%; p = 0.24). Median time to colonoscopy among colonoscopy completers was similar for pre- vs. intra-COVID-19 (46 vs. 42 days), but longer for individuals with IDA (60 vs. 49 days). There was no association between time period and colonoscopy completion (aHR: 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy work-up of CRC red flag signs and symptoms was not delayed within VHA during the COVID-19 pandemic, possibly due to VHA policies supporting prioritization and completion. Further work is needed to understand how COVID-19 policies on screening and surveillance impact CRC-related outcomes, and how to optimize colonoscopy completion after a red flag diagnosis.

Telephone Reminders Improve Fecal Immunochemical Test Return Rates

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a structured telephone reminder system on completion rates of screening fecal immunochemical tests.

METHODS

Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) return rates were compared among patients who received a telephone reminder after 14 days and those who did not receive a reminder.

RESULTS

There was a significantly higher return rate among patients who received a telephone reminder. Automated FIT tracking processes failed to capture a significant percentage of returned FITs compared with manual tracking processes.

DISCUSSION

These results support telephone reminders as an effective modality to increase FIT return rates.

Pre-endoscopy coronavirus disease 2019 screening and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 nucleic acid amplification testing in the Veterans Affairs healthcare system: clinical practice patterns, outcomes, and relationship to procedure volume

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had profound impacts worldwide, including on the performance of GI endoscopy. We aimed to describe the performance and outcomes of pre-endoscopy COVID-19 symptom and exposure screening and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) across the national Veterans Affairs healthcare system and describe the relationship of SARS-CoV-2 NAAT use and resumption of endoscopy services.

METHODS

COVID-19 screening and NAAT results from March 2020 to April 2021 were analyzed to determine use, performance characteristics of screening, and association between testing and endoscopic volume trends.

RESULTS

Of 220,891 completed endoscopies identified, 115,890 (52.5%) had documented preprocedure COVID-19 symptom and exposure screenings and 154,127 (69.8%) had preprocedure NAAT results within 7 days before scheduled endoscopy. Of 131,894 total canceled endoscopies, 26,475 (20.1%) had screening data and 28,505 (21.6%) had SARS-CoV-2 NAAT results. Overall, positive NAAT results were reported in 1.8% of all individuals tested and in 1.3% of those who screened negative. Among completed and canceled endoscopies, COVID-19 screening had a 34.6% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI], 32.4%-36.8%) and 96.4% specificity (95% CI, 96.2%-96.5%) when compared with NAAT. COVID-19 screening had a positive predictive value of 15.0% (95% CI, 14.0%-16.1%) and a negative predictive value of 98.7% (95% CI, 98.7%-98.8%). There was a very weak correlation between monthly testing and monthly endoscopy volume by site (Spearman rank correlation coefficient = .09).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings have important implications for decisions about preprocedure testing, especially given breakthrough infections among vaccinated individuals during the SARS-CoV-2 delta and omicron variant surge.

A Centralized Program with Stepped Support Increases Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening Over 9 Years: a Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Screening over many years is required to optimize colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of a CRC screening intervention on adherence to CRC screening over 9 years.

DESIGN

Randomized trial.

SETTING

Integrated health care system in Washington state.

PARTICIPANTS

Between August 2008 and November 2009, 4653 adults in a Washington state integrated health care system aged 50-74 due for CRC screening were randomized to usual care (UC; N =1163) or UC plus study interventions (interventions: N = 3490).

INTERVENTIONS

Years 1 and 2: (arm 1) UC or this plus study interventions; (arm 2) mailed fecal tests or information on scheduling colonoscopy; (arm 3) mailings plus brief telephone assistance; or (arm 4) mailings and assistance plus nurse navigation. In year 3, stepped-intensity participants (arms 2, 3, and 4 combined) still eligible for screening were randomized to either stopped or continued interventions in years 3 and 5-9.

MAIN MEASURES

Time in adherence to CRC testing over 9 years (covered time, primary outcome), and percent with no CRC testing in participants assigned to any intervention compared to UC only. Poisson regression models estimated incidence rate ratios for covered time, adjusting for patient characteristics and accounting for variable follow-up time.

KEY RESULTS

Compared to UC, intervention participants had 21% more covered time over 9 years (57.5% vs. 69.1%; adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 1.16-1.25, P<0.001). Fecal testing accounted for almost all additional covered time among intervention patients. Compared to UC, intervention participants were also more likely to have completed at least one CRC screening test over 9 years or until censorship (88.6% vs. 80.6%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

An outreach program that included mailed fecal tests and phone follow-up led to increased adherence to CRC testing and fewer age-eligible individuals without any CRC testing over 9 years.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Systems of Support (SOS) to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-up (SOS), NCT00697047, clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00697047.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Urological Care Delivery in the United States

PURPOSE

We examined changes in urological care delivery due to COVID-19 in the U.S. based on patient, practice, and local/regional demographic and pandemic response features.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed real-world data from the American Urological Association Quality (AQUA) Registry collected from electronic health record systems. Data represented 157 outpatient urological practices and 3,165 providers across 48 U.S. states and territories, including 3,297,721 unique patients, 12,488,831 total outpatient visits and 2,194,456 procedures. The primary outcome measure was the number of outpatient visits and procedures performed (inpatient or outpatient) per practice per week, measured from January 2019 to February 2021.

RESULTS

We found large (>50%) declines in outpatient visits from March 2020 to April 2020 across patient demographic groups and states, regardless of timing of state stay-at-home orders. Nonurgent outpatient visits decreased more across various nonurgent procedures (49%-59%) than for procedures performed for potentially urgent diagnoses (38%-52%); surgical procedures for nonurgent conditions also decreased more (43%-79%) than those for potentially urgent conditions (43%-53%). African American patients had similar decreases in outpatient visits compared with Asians and Caucasians, but also slower recoveries back to baseline. Medicare-insured patients had the steepest declines (55%), while those on Medicaid and government insurance had the lowest percentage of recovery to baseline (73% and 69%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides real-world evidence on the decline in urological care across demographic groups and practice settings, and demonstrates a differential impact on the utilization of urological health services by demographics and procedure type.

Cancer Screening During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of measures designed to mitigate the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on worldwide cancer screening. We systematically searched PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and EMBASE without language restrictions for studies published between January 1, 2021, and February 10, 2021. Studies selected for full-text review contained data on patients screened for any type of cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic and comparison data from a time interval just prior to the pandemic. Data were obtained through dual extraction. All the included studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias. A meta-analysis was performed on 13 studies: 7 on screening mammography, 5 on colon cancer screening, and 3 on cervical cancer screening. Two of our studies reported on more than one type of cancer screening. The screening outcomes were reported as pooled incidence rate ratios using the inverse variance method and random effects models. All studies included in our meta-analysis reported the number of patients screened for cancer in defined time intervals before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that the pooled incidence rate ratios were significantly lower for screening during the COVID-19 pandemic for breast cancer (0.63; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.77; P<.001), colon cancer (0.11; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.24; P<.001), and cervical cancer (0.10; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.24; P<.001). These findings may add further morbidity and mortality to this public health crisis.

Anxiety, depressive, and trauma symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evaluating the role of disappointment with God

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to pervasive social and economic disruptions. This cross-sectional investigation aimed to evaluate associations between religious/spiritual factors and mental health symptoms among community residents in a southern US state. In particular, we focused on perceptions of God's distance, a salient aspect of religious/spiritual struggle that has received little scrutiny in health research.

METHODS

Participants included 551 respondents assessed during a period of gradual reopening but rising infection rates. Mental health outcomes were assessed using standardized measures of generalized anxiety, depression, and trauma symptoms. Perceptions of an affirming relationship with God, anger at God, and disappointment at God's distance were evaluated using an adapted version of the Attitudes-Toward-God Scale-9.

RESULTS

In multivariate analyses that accounted for pandemic-related and demographic factors, positive relationships with God were related to diminished symptoms on all three mental heatlh indices (all p's ≤.003), whereas disappointment with God's distance was associated with more pronounced difficulties (all p's ≤.014).

LIMTATIONS

The cross-sectional design precludes causal conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that perceived relationships with God are tied to clinically relevant mental health outcomes during periods of major upheaval. Disappointment with God's distance may be an important, understudied dimension of religious/spiritual struggle meriting further investigation.

AGA Rapid Review and Guideline for SARS-CoV2 Testing and Endoscopy Post-Vaccination: 2021 Update

This guideline provides updated recommendations on the role of preprocedure testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) in individuals undergoing endoscopy in the post-vaccination period and replaces the prior guideline from the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) (released July 29, 2020). Since the start of the pandemic, our increased understanding of transmission has facilitated the implementation of practices to promote patient and health care worker (HCW) safety. Simultaneously, there has been increasing recognition of the potential harm associated with delays in patient care, as well as inefficiency of endoscopy units. With widespread vaccination of HCWs and the general population, a re-evaluation of AGA's prior recommendations was warranted. In order to update the role of preprocedure testing for SARS-CoV2, the AGA guideline panel reviewed the evidence on prevalence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV2 infections in individuals undergoing endoscopy; patient and HCW risk of infections that may be acquired immediately before, during, or after endoscopy; effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine in reducing risk of infections and transmission; patient and HCW anxiety; patient delays in care and potential impact on cancer burden; and endoscopy volumes. The panel considered the certainty of the evidence, weighed the benefits and harms of routine preprocedure testing, and considered burden, equity, and cost using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Based on very low certainty evidence, the panel made a conditional recommendation against routine preprocedure testing for SARS-CoV2 in patients scheduled to undergo endoscopy. The panel placed a high value on minimizing additional delays in patient care, acknowledging the reduced endoscopy volumes, downstream impact on delayed cancer diagnoses, and burden of testing on patients.

Lessons Learned in Managing Patients with Colorectal Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic

OPINION STATEMENT

The COVID-19 pandemic forced us to rapidly and dramatically shift our medical priorities and decision making. With little literature or experience to rely on, the initial priority was to minimize patient exposure to the hospital and to others. It remains unclear whether cancer patients are at higher risk of infection or serious complications, or if it is our traditional therapies that place them to be at higher risk. By far, the greatest negative impact was on screening. Routine colonoscopies were considered elective, and as a result, delays in diagnosis will be felt for years to come. The most positive changes were the incorporation of tele-visits, increased use of oral therapies, alterations in treatment schedules of both chemotherapy and radiation, and an increased emphasis on neoadjuvant therapy. These too will be felt for years to come. The colorectal cancer medical community has responded collaboratively and effectively to maintain treatment and to optimize outcomes for our patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Utilization of EGD and Colonoscopy in the United States: An Analysis of the GIQuIC Registry

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has limited the ability to perform endoscopy. The aim of this study was to quantify the impact of the pandemic on endoscopy volumes and indications in the United States.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of data from the GI Quality Improvement Consortium (GIQuIC) registry. We compared volumes of colonoscopy and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) during the pandemic (March-September 2020) to before the pandemic (January 2019-February 2020). The primary outcome was change in monthly volumes. Secondary outcomes included changes in the distribution of procedure indications and in procedure volume by region of United States, patient characteristics, trainee involvement, and practice setting, as well as colorectal cancer diagnoses.

RESULTS

Among 451 sites with 3514 endoscopists, the average monthly volume of colonoscopies and EGDs dropped by 38.5% and 33.4%, respectively. There was regional variation, with the greatest and least decline in procedures in the Northeast and South, respectively. There was a modest shift in procedure indications from prevention to diagnostic, an initial increase in performance in the hospital setting, and a decrease in procedures with trainees. The decline in volume of colonoscopy and EGD during the first 7 months of the pandemic was equivalent to approximately 2.7 and 2.4 months of prepandemic productivity, respectively. Thirty percent fewer colorectal cancers were diagnosed compared to expected.

CONCLUSION

These data on actual endoscopy utilization nationally during the pandemic can help in anticipating impact of delays in care on outcomes and planning for the recovery phase.

Patients' Willingness to Share Limited Endoscopic Resources: A Brief Report on the Results of a Large Regional Survey

Background. In some health care systems, patients face long wait times for screening colonoscopy. We sought to assess whether patients at low risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) would be willing to delay their own colonoscopy so higher-risk peers could undergo colonoscopy sooner. Methods. We surveyed 1054 Veterans regarding their attitudes toward repeat colonoscopy and risk-based prioritization. We used multivariable regression to identify patient factors associated with willingness to delay screening for a higher-risk peer. Results. Despite a physician recommendation to stop screening, 29% of respondents reported being "not at all likely" to stop. However, 94% reported that they would be willing to delay their own colonoscopy for a higher-risk peer. Greater trust in physician and greater health literacy were positively associated with willingness to wait, while greater perceived threat of CRC and Black or Latino race/ethnicity were negatively associated with willingness to wait. Conclusion. Despite high enthusiasm for repeat screening, patients were willing to delay their own colonoscopy for higher-risk peers. Appealing to altruism could be effective when utilizing scarce resources.

Assessment of Video Capsule Endoscopy in the Management of Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding During the COVID-19 Pandemic

IMPORTANCE

Evaluation of acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding using invasive endoscopic procedures comprising the standard of care (SOC)-upper endoscopy and colonoscopy-can expose the endoscopy staff to SARS-CoV-2. Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) does not generate aerosols and only requires 1 person to manage the procedure.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the safety of VCE for the initial evaluation of GI bleeding at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic to identify signs of active bleeding while minimizing patient and personnel exposure, saving personal protective equipment, and avoiding invasive or unnecessary procedures.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A multicenter (UMass Memorial Medical Center and Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center) retrospective cohort study including 146 patients with COVID-19 who received VCE as the first-line diagnostic modality was conducted from March 15 to June 15, 2020, compared with SOC in January 2020 for evaluation of GI bleeding. The association between treatment and outcomes was estimated using multivariable regression adjusting for potential confounders. Propensity score matching was used to verify the results.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was detection of active bleeding or stigmata of recent bleeding. Secondary end points included the number of patients requiring any invasive procedures, number of additional procedures, rates of rebleeding and rehospitalization, transfusion requirements, and mortality.

RESULTS

Among 146 patients, 92 (63.0%) were men; mean (SD) age was 64.93 (14.13) years in the COVID-19 group and 61.33 (13.39) years in the SOC group. Active bleeding or stigmata of recent bleeding was observed in 44 (59.5%) patients in the COVID-19 group compared with 18 (25.0%) in the SOC group (adjusted odds ratio, 5.23; 95% CI, 2.23 to 12.27). Only 36 patients (48.7%) in the COVID-19 group required any invasive procedure during the hospitalization compared with 70 (97.2%) in the SOC group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.001 to 0.08). The mean (SD) number of invasive procedures was 0.59 (0.77) per patient in the COVID-19 group compared with 1.18 (0.48) per patient in the SOC group (adjusted difference, -0.54; 95% CI, -0.77 to -0.31). Both approaches appeared to be safe and there was no significant difference in transfusion requirements, rebleeding, rehospitalization, or in-hospital mortality. No mortality was attributed to GI bleeding in either group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, first-line diagnostic evaluation of acute GI bleeding using VCE appeared to be a safe and useful alternative to the traditional approach of upper endoscopy and colonoscopy. Use of VCE was associated with increased detection of active bleeding and a reduced number of invasive procedures and unnecessary exposure of personnel to SARS-CoV-2 and use of personal protective equipment.