A survey on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on motility and functional investigations in Europe and considerations for recommencing activities in the early recovery phase

Decision-making framework for identifying regions vulnerable to transmission of COVID-19 pandemic

At the beginning of 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) identified an unusual coronavirus and declared the associated COVID-19 disease as a global pandemic. We proposed a novel hybrid fuzzy decision-making framework to identify and analyze these transmission factors and conduct proactive decision-making in this context. We identified thirty factors from the extant literature and classified them into six major clusters (climate, hygiene and safety, responsiveness to decision-making, social and demographic, economic, and psychological) with the help of domain experts. We chose the most relevant twenty-five factors using the Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) screening from the initial thirty. We computed the weights of those clusters and their constituting factors and ranked them based on their criticality, applying the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP). We found that the top five factors were global travel, delay in travel restriction, close contact, social cohesiveness, and asymptomatic. To evaluate our framework, we chose ten different geographically located cities and analyzed their exposure to COVID-19 pandemic by ranking them based on their vulnerability of transmission using Fuzzy Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity To Ideal Solution (FTOPSIS). Our study contributes to the disciplines of decision analytics and healthcare risk management during a pandemic through these novel findings. Policymakers and healthcare officials will benefit from our study by formulating and improving existing preventive measures to mitigate future global pandemics. Finally, we performed a sequence of sensitivity analyses to check for the robustness and generalizability of our proposed hybrid decision-making framework.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on high-resolution manometry and peroral endoscopic myotomy for esophageal motility disorder in Japan

AIM

To elucidate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the practice of high-resolution manometry (HRM) and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in Japan.

METHODS

We utilized a large-scale database involving 14 high-volume centers in Japan to investigate changes in the numbers of HRM and POEM procedures performed and outcomes of POEM between 2019 and 2020. A questionnaire survey was also conducted to analyze pandemic-associated changes in the HRM and POEM protocols.

RESULTS

Compared to that in 2019, the number of HRM and POEM procedures decreased by 17.2% (1587-1314) and 20.9% (630-498), respectively. These declines were prominent during the state of emergency from April to May 2020, particularly in pandemic areas. HRM and POEM in nonpandemic areas were relatively unaffected. From 2019 to 2020, there was a 0.4% (254-248) decrease in POEM cases within the prefecture, but the number outside the prefecture decreased by 33.6% (372-247). During the pandemic, the safety and efficacy of POEM were maintained. The implementation of personal protective equipment (PPE) measures varied among facilities, and PPE for POEM was relatively insufficient compared to that for HRM.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic influenced HRM and POEM practices in Japan. It is necessary to establish a sufficient system for HRM and POEM in each hospital as well as countrywide to overcome the effects of the pandemic.

Gastrointestinal symptoms and healthcare utilization have increased among patients with functional gastrointestinal and motility disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented disruptions in healthcare. Functional gastrointestinal and motility disorders (FGIMD) are associated with significant healthcare utilization. The clinical implications of these healthcare disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical outcomes in patients with FGIMD are unclear.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of patients with three common FGIMD (irritable bowel syndrome [IBS], gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia [FD]) tested for SARS-CoV-2 to describe alterations in gastrointestinal symptoms, medication use, and healthcare utilization during and before the pandemic and factors associated with COVID-19.

KEY RESULTS

The prevalence of COVID-19 during the pandemic (03/2020-09/2020) was 3.20% (83/2592) among patients with FGIMD, 3.62% in IBS (57/1574), 3.07% in gastroparesis (23/749), and 2.44% in FD (29/1187) at our institution. Patients with FGIMD had increased abdominal pain, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, and weight loss (p < 0.001) along with increased proton pump inhibitor, H2 blocker, and opioid use (p < 0.0001). Both inpatient hospitalizations and outpatient visits (p < 0.0001) and number of diagnostic tests including cross-sectional imaging (p = 0.002), and upper and lower endoscopies (p < 0.0001) were significantly higher during the pandemic as compared to 6 months prior. Diarrhea-predominant IBS was positively (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.34-4.19, p = 0.003) associated with COVID-19, whereas functional dyspepsia was negatively (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27-0.79, p = 0.004) associated.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Patients with common functional gastrointestinal and motility disorders have reported more gastrointestinal symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic with concurrent increased medication use and healthcare utilization.

Evaluating the impact of an enhanced triage process on the performance and diagnostic yield of oesophageal physiology studies post COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted on the provision of oesophageal physiology investigations. During the recovery phase, triaging tools were empirically recommended by national bodies for prioritisation of referrals amidst rising waiting lists and reduced capacity. We evaluated the performance of an enhanced triage process (ETP) consisting of telephone triage combined with the hierarchical 'traffic light system' recommended in the UK for prioritising oesophageal physiology referrals.

DESIGN

In a cross-sectional study of patients referred for oesophageal physiology studies at a tertiary centre, data were compared between patients who underwent oesophageal physiology studies 6 months prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and those who were investigated within 6 months after service resumption with implementation of the ETP.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Adjusted time from referral to investigation; non-attendance rates; the detection of Chicago Classification (CC) oesophageal motility disorders on oesophageal manometry and severity of acid reflux on 24 hours pH/impedance monitoring.

RESULTS

Following service resumption, the ETP reduced non-attendance rates from 9.1% to 2.8% (p=0.021). Use of the 'traffic light system' identified a higher proportion of patients with CC oesophageal motility disorders in the 'amber' and 'red' triage categories, compared with the 'green' category (p=0.011). ETP also reduced the time to test for those who were subsequently found to have a major CC oesophageal motility diagnosis compared with those with minor CC disorders and normal motility (p=0.004). The ETP did not affect the yield or timing of acid reflux studies.

CONCLUSION

ETPs can effectively prioritise patients with oesophageal motility disorders and may therefore have a role beyond the current pandemic.

The Status of Dysphagia Clinics During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The study aimed to determine the status of dysphagia clinics and procedures applied in dysphagia clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinicians working in an outpatient dysphagia clinic were included. A 30-question survey inquiring about the descriptive information of the participants and their clinics, their clinical practice, and the tele-health applications during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was administered via Google forms. The participants were asked to fill out the survey on behalf of their clinics. One survey was completed per dysphagia clinic. Twenty-three clinicians responded on behalf of their clinics. The number of patients and dysphagia evaluations decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic (p < 0.05). The COVID-19 screening procedures mostly performed before dysphagia evaluations were temperature check (n = 14, 60.9%), nasopharyngeal swab test (n = 9, 39.1%), anamnestic risk assessment (n = 6, 26.1%), and saturation test (n = 6, 26.1%). Protective equipments mostly used while dysphagia evaluations were surgical mask, FFP3 mask, standard gloves, glasses, and face shield. It was found that 69.6% (n = 16) of the dysphagia clinics were reported to be suitable for working under pandemic conditions, and 30.4% (n = 7) were reported to be unsuitable. The use of tele-health applications significantly increased from 13.0% (n = 3) to 52.2% (n = 12) (p = 0.003). The present study provides a general overview of the status of dysphagia clinics and procedures applied in dysphagia clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic period. The study showed that working conditions, the number of patients, and the total number of evaluations have changed throughout the pandemic, and the use of tele-health applications increased.

Risk of COVID-19 transmission in esophageal, anorectal manometry and 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring

BACKGROUND

the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to the interruption of most manometry or impedance-pH monitoring studies. The risk of restarting activities is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

assess the risk of SARS-CoV-2 virus infection, both to patients and healthcare workers, in relation to esophageal and anorectal functional tests during the pandemic without protective measures.

METHOD

a questionnaire was designed to determine whether patients and healthcare workers had COVID-19, confirmed by either a test or compatible symptoms, after functional studies were performed from January until March 2020.

RESULTS

the survey was answered by 263 (92.9 %) patients. Four (1.52 %) patients had confirmed COVID-19 in the two weeks after the functional test (adjusted rate 8.34 cases per 1,000 [95 % CI -0.06-16.74], OR 0.84 [95 % CI: 0.83-0.85], p < 0.001) and no patient after anorectal manometry. Another five had only compatible symptoms, for a total of nine patients (3.42 %) (adjusted rate 27.50 cases/1,000 [95 % CI: 7.27-47.74], OR 2.84 [95 % CI: 2.81-2.87]). In the total study period, 18.25 % had confirmed COVID-19 or compatible symptoms. The average number of days between the procedure and the first day of symptoms was progressively shortened (January: 56 days, February: 33 days, March: 10.5 days). Two of ten healthcare workers (20 %) had confirmed COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

the risk of COVID-19 infection when performing functional tests is low and more related to the evolution of the pandemic rather than to the procedure itself. The small number of healthcare workers included in the study does not allow a definitive conclusion to be drawn on their risk of infection.

Alternative Strategy Adopted in Practical Assessment for Pathology Postgraduate Certification Examination Amidst COVID-19 Nationwide Lockdown: An Indian Experience with a Novel Hybrid Method of Assessment

BACKGROUND

A major concern and challenge faced by the educational institution during coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and consequent lockdown is the timely conduct of the summative assessment. Unlike cognitive assessment, real-time practical assessment through online mode, without compromising principles of assessment is difficult. This study was performed to analyze an alternative hybrid approach adopted for the postgraduate practical summative assessment in pathology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Evaluation of the process of summative assessment was done where internal and external examiners synchronously assessed examinees real-time on-site (face to face) and off-site (remotely through live videoconferencing) respectively. A pre-validated questionnaire on a novel approach for assessment and feedback (with close-ended on 5-point Likert scale and open-ended questions) were administered to nine participants comprising three final year postgraduates in pathology, four examiners (two internal and two externals) and two technical experts from the Department of Pathology. Overall scores obtained by all examinees were recorded. A pre-validated questionnaire and feedback were administered to the participants to assess the novel approach to assessment.

RESULTS

The mean performance score obtained by examinees was 63.5% in the summative assessment. Feedback analysis revealed that 85% of participants strongly agreed and the rest (15%) agreed that essential minor deviations introduced in this novel mode of assessment did not compromise basic principles and goals of assessment. Quality of assessment through this mode of assessment was graded as good to excellent. All participants responded that this mode of examination may be applied in the future under similar circumstances.

CONCLUSION

This study concludes that an alternative novel hybrid method of real-time synchronous assessment with on-site and off-site examiners may be a feasible and successful model for conducting summative assessment and can be practiced in time of need.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Gastrointestinal Motility Testing in Asia and Europe

Background: The new coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has high infection and mortality rates, and has become a pandemic. The infection and mortality rates are lower in Asian countries than in European countries. This study aimed to conduct a survey on the effects of COVID-19 on the capacity to perform gastrointestinal motility tests in Asian countries compared with European countries. Methods: We used the questionnaire previously established by our team for researchers in European countries. The correlation between the decreased rate of gastrointestinal motility and function tests, and the infection/mortality rates of COVID-19 and stringency of a government’s interventions in each country was analysed and protective measures were assessed. Results: In total, 58 gastroenterologists/motility experts in Asian countries responded to this survey. The infection/mortality rates of COVID-19 and Stringency Index had a significant impact on the testing capacity of oesophageal manometry and catheter-based pH monitoring. In European countries, most facilities used filtering facepiece 2/3 (FFP2/3) masks during oesophageal motility studies. Meanwhile, in Asian countries, most facilities used surgical masks. Conclusion: The total infection and mortality rates of COVID-19 can affect the rate of gastrointestinal motility testing and the type of protective equipment that must be used.

Statements for conducting high-resolution manometry during the COVID-19 pandemic

To ensure the safety of medical personnel is important during the new coronavirus infectious disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Although high-resolution manometry (HRM) is an essential device for diagnosis of functional gastrointestinal disorders, it contains risks of droplet infection, contact infection and aerosol-borne infection. Screening tests such as PCR, serology test to detect COVID-19 antibodies, and CT scan should be considered as well as body temperature check and anamnestic risk assessment. Moreover, the provision of protective equipment such as a mask with face shield (or goggles + mask), gloves, cap or hairnet, and a long-sleeved gown would be necessary to reduce the risk of COVID-19.

European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility recommendations for conducting gastrointestinal motility and function testing in the recovery phase of the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

During the peak of the COronaVIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, care for patients with gastrointestinal motility and functional disorders was largely suspended. In the recovery phases of the pandemic, non-urgent medical care is resumed, but there is a lack of guidance for restarting and safely conducting motility and function testing. Breath tests and insertion of manometry and pH-monitoring probes carry a risk of SARS-CoV-2 spread through droplet formation.

METHODS

A panel of experts from the European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) evaluated emerging national and single-center recommendations to provide the best current evidence and a pragmatic approach to ensure the safe conduct of motility and function testing for both healthcare professionals and patients.

RESULTS

At a general level, this involves evaluation of the urgency of the procedure, evaluation of the infectious risk associated with the patient, the investigation and the healthcare professional(s) involved, provision of the test planning and test units, education and training of staff, and use of personnel protection equipment. Additional guidance is provided for specific procedures such as esophageal manometry, pH monitoring, and breath tests.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

The ESNM guidelines provide pragmatic and appropriate guidance for the safe conduct of motility and function testing in the COVID-19 pandemic and early recovery phase.