Background Simethicone is an anti-foaming agent which can be used to decrease the surface tension of air bubbles and improve visualization of colonic mucosa during colonoscopy. Recent studies have found that residual simethicone persists in endoscopes despite reprocessing and disinfection and promotes persistent moisture in endoscope channels. Simethicone residues can theoretically contribute to biofilm formation by providing nutritional milieu for microbial growth, which could increase the risk of transmission of infections among patients. Endoscopists’ perceptions on simethicone use and potential benefits are unknown, and this study aims to start filling this gap. Aims To assess experience and perceptions of simethicone use during colonoscopy in North America. Methods A REDCap® survey was distributed via email to members of various national professional associations and personal contacts of the study authors. Once the survey is complete, logistic regression analysis will be performed to assess univariate and multivariate associations of simethicone use. Preliminary data are reported in this abstract. Results 47 practicing endoscopists have responded so far, of which 31 (64%) are surgeons and 16 are gastroenterologists (34%). The participants had been in practice for a median of eight years (range 1 – 34 years) and performed a median of ten colonoscopies per week. All 47 endoscopists practiced in Canada, with representation from seven provinces. Two endoscopists (4%) ask patients to use simethicone orally as part of their bowel preparation. During outpatient colonoscopy, 22 endoscopists (47%) never use simethicone, 19 endoscopists (40%) use simethicone less than 50% of the time, and six endoscopists (13%) use simethicone more than 50% of the time. Endoscopists were divided as to whether certain bowel preparations influenced their use of simethicone (agree or strongly agree 9, 19%; neutral 29, 62%; disagree or strongly disagree 9, 19%), that simethicone use could contribute to the transmission of pathogens through endoscopes (agree or strongly agree 6, 13%; neutral 34, 72%; disagree or strongly disagree 7, 15%), or that simethicone use increases their adenoma detection rate (agree or strongly agree 18, 38%; neutral 21, 45%; disagree or strongly disagree 8, 17%). Conclusions Of the current respondents of this survey, just over half (53%) of endoscopists report using simethicone during outpatient colonoscopies. Most reported simethicone use was via the water pump or instrument channel; oral simethicone use maybe minimal. Current respondents were divided in their perception that type of bowel preparation influences their use of simethicone or that simethicone use could contribute to the transmission of pathogens. Many endoscopists believed simethicone use could increase their adenoma detection rate. Funding Agencies None
Background Several studies have demonstrated a high utilization of colonoscopy at shorter and longer time intervals than guideline recommendations. Innovative methods are required to increase adherence to recommended timing. Aims 1) Explore current approaches used by endoscopist (EPs) and primary care providers (PCPs) to determine and communicate colonoscopy surveillance intervals (SI) between EPs, PCPs, and patients. 2) Obtain feedback for refining a decision tool to facilitate recommended SI. 3) Determine participant agreement of recommended SIs with current guidelines. Methods We conducted 4 focus groups (FGs); 3 FGs included EPs (n=12) and EPs in training (n=6); 1 FG included PCPs (n=4). FG questions explored use of guidelines, communication and follow-up practices with PCPs, EPs and patients, and challenges to follow-up. Participants were also asked for feedback about a prototype polyp SI decision tool that was developed using an algorithm synthesizing current Canadian Association of Gastroenterology, US Multisociety Task Force, and expert panel guidelines on SI. FGs were audio-recorded and transcribed for qualitative content analysis. FGs were analysed separately, then compared for similarities and differences. Finally, participants individually made interval recommendations for 7 common endoscopy scenarios. Responses were analyzed for agreement with the guidelines used to develop the decision tool. Results EPs reported not routinely referring to guidelines and were confident in their memory of the intervals although some reported checking occasionally. Many indicated they may use the tool in a web based or mobile application for more complicated scenarios, although some would never use it. Concerns regarding the tool included being up to date with research evidence and having required data to input on hand. PCPs reported the tool may be useful as a communication aid to involve patients in decision making. A challenge noted in all FGs was role confusion regarding communicating, tracking, and scheduling patients’ future procedures on time. Analysis of EPs (n=9) responses to the 7 scenarios showed that percent agreement with guidelines was low: 44% scored below 50% correct. Participants with the highest agreement scored 6/7; responses with the lowest agreement scored 0/7. The most common score was 3/7. Conclusions EPs appeared to be overconfident in their recommendations, but many were open to trying a website or mobile application decision tool to make evidence-based colonoscopy SI recommendations. Understanding, among PCPs and EPs, regarding responsibility for communicating results and scheduling follow-up surveillance for patients was inconsistent. Participant feedback informed development of a mobile application that is currently being pilot tested. Funding Agencies Research Manitoba
The 19th annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference (wcgccc) was held in Winnipeg, Manitoba, 29-30 September 2017. The wcgccc is an interactive multidisciplinary conference attended by health care professionals from across Western Canada (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba) who are involved in the care of patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists; pathologists; radiologists; and allied health care professionals participated in presentation and discussion sessions for the purpose of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses current issues in the management of colorectal cancer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.