The 2012 SAGE wait times program: Survey of Access to GastroEnterology in Canada

BACKGROUND:

Periodically surveying wait times for specialist health services in Canada captures current data and enables comparisons with previous surveys to identify changes over time.

METHODS:

During one week in April 2012, Canadian gastroenterologists were asked to complete a questionnaire (online or by fax) recording demographics, reason for referral, and dates of referral and specialist visits for at least 10 consecutive new patients (five consultations and five procedures) who had not been seen previously for the same indication. Wait times were determined for 18 indications and compared with those from similar surveys conducted in 2008 and 2005.

RESULTS:

Data regarding adult patients were provided by 173 gastroenterologists for 1374 consultations, 540 procedures and 293 same-day consultations and procedures. Nationally, the median wait times were 92 days (95% CI 85 days to 100 days) from referral to consultation, 55 days (95% CI 50 days to 61 days) from consultation to procedure and 155 days (95% CI 142 days to 175 days) (total) from referral to procedure. Overall, wait times were longer in 2012 than in 2005 (P<0.05); the wait time to same-day consultation and procedure was shorter in 2012 than in 2008 (78 days versus 101 days; P<0.05), but continued to be longer than in 2005 (P<0.05). The total wait time remained longest for screening colonoscopy, increasing from 201 days in 2008 to 279 days in 2012 (P<0.05).

DISCUSSION:

Wait times for gastroenterology services continue to exceed recommended targets, remain unchanged since 2008 and exceed wait times reported in 2005.     

Safe and effective use of conscious sedation for defibrillation threshold testing during ICD implantation

Background

Over a period of years general anesthesia has been a standard anesthetic technique for defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing at the time of implant. DFT testing without general anesthesia cover has gained limited acceptance. Use of local anesthesia combined with deep sedation for DFT testing might facilitate and simplify these procedures by reducing the procedural time, staff time, avoiding inefficient service in organizing anesthetic cover; thereby improving patient compliance.

Objective

The objective of this study was to evaluate feasibility, safety and efficacy of conscious sedation for DFT testing during Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) implantation.

Method

Data of 87 non-selected patients who achieved adequate sedation with titrated doses of midazolam and pethidine were analyzed retrospectively. These medications were administered by a circulating nurse under the supervision of the implanting physicians. All hemodynamic measures, treatment and complications were monitored and recorded throughout the procedure.

Results

A retrospective analysis of data from 87 patients who underwent ICD implantation and DFT testing under conscious sedation at our center was reported. The mean dose of midazolam and pethidine administered was 4.9 ± 1.8 and 47.7 ± 20 mg, respectively. During the period of conscious sedation, no patient depicted episode of sustained apnea. No major complication or mortality was reported.

Conclusion

Use of conscious sedation as an alternative to the use of general anesthesia for DFT testing during ICD implantation is found to be feasible, safe and effective, with an added advantage of reduced procedural time and improved patient compliance.     

Survey of Access to GastroEnterology in Canada: The SAGE wait times program

BACKGROUND:

Assessment of current wait times for specialist health services in Canada is a key method that can assist government and health care providers to plan wisely for future health needs. These data are not readily available. A method to capture wait time data at the time of consultation or procedure has been developed, which should be applicable to other specialist groups and also allows for assessment of wait time trends over intervals of years.

METHODS:

In November 2008, gastroenterologists across Canada were asked to complete a questionnaire (online or by fax) that included personal demographics and data from one week on at least five consecutive new consultations and five consecutive procedure patients who had not previously undergone a procedure for the same indication. Wait times were collected for 18 primary indications and results were then compared with similar survey data collected in 2005.

RESULTS:

The longest wait times observed were for screening colonoscopy (201 days) and surveillance of previous colon cancer or polyps (272 days). The shortest wait times were for cancer-likely based on imaging or physical examination (82 days), severe or rapidly progressing dysphagia or odynophagia (83 days), documented iron-deficiency anemia (90 days) and dyspepsia with alarm symptoms (99 days). Compared with 2005 data, total wait times in 2008 were lengthened overall (127 days versus 155 days; P<0.05) and for most of the seven individual indications that permitted data comparison.

CONCLUSION:

Median wait times for gastroenterology services continue to exceed consensus conference recommended targets and have significantly worsened since 2005.     

Delayed Flumazenil Injection after Endoscopic Sedation Increases Patient Satisfaction Compared with Immediate Flumazenil Injection

Background/Aims

Flumazenil was administered after the completion of endoscopy under sedation to reduce recovery time and increase patient safety. We evaluated patient satisfaction after endoscopy under sedation according to the timing of a postprocedural flumazenil injection.

Methods

In total, 200 subjects undergoing concurrent colonoscopy and upper endoscopy while sedated with midazolam and meperidine were enrolled in our investigation. We randomly administered 0.3 mg of flumazenil either immediately or 15 minutes after the endoscopic procedure. A postprocedural questionnaire and next day telephone interview were conducted to assess patient satisfaction.

Results

Flumazenil injection timing did not affect the time spent in the recovery room when comparing the two groups of patients. However, the subjects in the 15 minutes injection group were more satisfied with undergoing endoscopy under sedation than the patients in the immediate injection group according to the postprocedural survey (p=0.019). However, no difference in overall satisfaction, memory, or willingness to undergo a future endoscopy was observed between the two groups when the telephone survey was conducted on the following day.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that a delayed flumazenil injection after endoscopic sedation increased patient satisfaction without prolonging recovery time, even though the benefit of the delayed flumazenil injection did not persist into the following day.     

Reactions to a targeted intervention to increase fecal occult blood testing among average-risk adults waiting for screening colonoscopy

BACKGROUND:

Increasing demand combined with limited capacity has resulted in long wait times for average-risk adults referred for screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer. Management of patients on these growing wait lists is an emerging clinical issue.

OBJECTIVE:

To inform the content and design of a mailed targeted invitation for patients to undergo annual fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) while awaiting colonoscopy.

METHODS:

Focus groups (FGs) with average-risk patients on a wait list for screening colonoscopy at a high-throughput academic outpatient colonoscopy facility were conducted. During each FG session, feedback regarding a range of materials under consideration for the planned intervention was elicited using a semistructured facilitator guide. The FG sessions were recorded and transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using the constant comparative method to identify key themes.

RESULTS:

Findings from the three FGs (n=28) suggested that average-risk patients on a wait list for screening colonoscopy would be receptive to a targeted intervention recommending they undergo FOBT while waiting. Participants indicated that the invitation to undergo FOBT was an important acknowledgement that they were on an actively managed list, and that a mechanism to ensure that they were correctly triaged while waiting was in place. Several specific suggestions to improve the design of the targeted intervention were obtained.

CONCLUSIONS:

Results of the present study provide useful information for developing effective strategies to manage average-risk individuals facing long wait times for screening colonoscopy.     

How established wait time benchmarks significantly underestimate total wait times for cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND:

Wait times for cardiac surgery are well established but may not reflect the total wait time patients experience.

METHODS:

The Maritime Heart Center (Halifax, Nova Scotia) cardiac surgery database was used to identify all consecutive patients who underwent elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery between 2002 and 2005 from a single urgency queue. The provincial physician billing database provided a timeline record of dates, physician visits, and diagnoses or procedures performed for each patient. This information was used to assess total and component wait times leading to cardiac surgery.

RESULTS:

A total of 705 consecutive patients were included and stratified based on geographical location: urban Halifax Regional Municipality (HRM; n=222), urban non-HRM (n=220) and rural (n=263). Patients from all regions did not differ in age, sex, comorbidities or ventricular function. Using a traditional definition of wait time (time listed), patients waited a median of 56 days (interquartile range [IQR] 38 to 77 days). In comparison, the total wait times based on the time from presentation to surgery were a median of 109 days (IQR 56 to 184 days) for HRM, a median of 121 days (IQR 77 to 184 days) for urban non-HRM and a median of 123 days (IQR 79 to 169 days) for rural patients (P-value nonsignificant). Two modes of presentation emerged that were not influenced by a patient’s geographical location. Patients who presented to the emergency department (n=229) waited a median of 73 days. This was significantly less than patients who presented to their family physician (n=476), who waited a median of 135 days (P<0.001). The difference in overall wait for patients presenting to the emergency room was a result of a shorter wait time for referral to a specialist and from seeing a specialist to catheterization.

CONCLUSION:

The present pilot study demonstrated that total patient wait times for cardiac care and surgery in Nova Scotia are significantly longer (more than twofold) than traditionally reported wait times for surgery alone.     

A survey of sedation practices for colonoscopy in Canada

BACKGROUND:

There are limited data regarding the use of sedation for colonoscopy and concomitant monitoring practices in different countries.

METHODS:

A survey was mailed to 445 clinician members of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and 80 members of the Canadian Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons in May and June 2009.

RESULTS:

Sixty-five per cent of Canadian Association of Gastroenterology members and 69% of Canadian Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons members responded with the full survey. Most endoscopists reported using sedation for more than 90% of colonoscopies. The most common sedation regimen was a combination of midazolam and fentanyl. Propofol, either alone or with another drug, was used in 12% of cases. A higher proportion (94%) of adult gastroenterologists who routinely used propofol were highly satisfied compared with those using other sedative agents (45%; P<0.001). Fifty per cent of adult gastroenterologists and 29% of surgeons who were not currently using propofol expressed interest in starting to use it for routine colonoscopies. Only a single nurse was present in the endoscopy room during colonoscopy performed by two-thirds of the endoscopists.

CONCLUSIONS:

Results of the present survey suggest that gastroenterologists in Canada use sedation for colonoscopy in more than 90% of their patients. There was higher satisfaction among gastroenterologists who used propofol routinely for all colonoscopies. Most endoscopy rooms were staffed by a single nurse, which may limit further increases in the use of propofol. Further studies are needed to determine optimal staffing of endoscopy units with and without the use of propofol. Sedation practices of general surgery endoscopists need to be evaluated.     

A survey of the practice of after-hours and emergency endoscopy in Canada

OBJECTIVE:

To determine staffing and practice patterns for after-hours endoscopy service in Canada

METHODS:

A link to a web-based survey was sent by e-mail to all clinical members of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology in February 2011. A priori, it was planned to compare variations in practice among gastroenterologists (GIs) performing endoscopy in different regions of Canada, between pediatric and adult GIs, and between university and community hospitals.

RESULTS:

Of 422 potential respondents, 168 (40%) responded. Of the 139 adult GIs, 61% performed after-hours endoscopy in the endoscopy suite where daytime procedures were performed, 62% had a trained endoscopy nurse available for all procedures, 38% had access to propofol sedation, 12% reprocessed the endoscopes themselves or with the help of a resident, 4% had out-of-hospital patients come directly to their endoscopy suite and 53% were highly satisfied. The adult endoscopists practising at community hospitals were more likely to have an anesthetist attend the procedure. Regional differences were noted, with more involvement of anesthetists (13%) and availability of propofol (50%) in Ontario, more frequent reprocessing of endoscopes in the central reprocessing units in British Columbia (78%) and almost universal availability of a trained endoscopy nurse (96%) with concomitant higher endoscopist satisfaction (84% highly satisfied) in Alberta.

CONCLUSIONS:

More than one-third of surveyed endoscopists across the country do not have a trained endoscopy nurse to assist in after-hours endoscopy – the time period when urgent patients often present and typically require therapeutic endoscopic interventions. There are significant regional differences in the practice of after-hours endoscopy in Canada.     

Wait times from presentation to treatment for colorectal cancer: A population-based study

BACKGROUND:

The wait time from cancer diagnosis to treatment has been a recent focus of cancer care in Canada.

OBJECTIVE:

To examine the trends in wait times from patient presentation to treatment (overall health system wait time [OWT]) for colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS:

Patients with colorectal adenocarcinomas, diagnosed between 2001 and 2005, and their first definitive treatments were identified from the population-based Manitoba Cancer Registry (Winnipeg, Manitoba). By linkage to Manitoba Health and Healthy Living’s administrative databases, a patient’s first gastrointestinal investigation (abdominal radiological imaging, lower gastrointestinal endoscopy or fecal occult blood test) before CRC diagnosis was identified. The index contact with the health care system was estimated from the date of the visit with the physician who ordered the first gastroenterological investigation. The OWT was defined as the time from the index contact to the first treatment, while diagnostic delay was defined as the time from the index contact to the diagnosis of CRC. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to determine independent predictors of OWT.

RESULTS:

The OWT was estimated for 2552 cases of CRC over the five years that were examined. The median OWT increased from 61 days in 2001 to 95 days in 2005 (P<0.001). Most of the increase was in diagnostic wait times (median of 44 days in 2001 versus 64 days in 2005 [P<0.001]). Year of diagnosis, older age, urban residence and diagnosis at a teaching facility were independent predictors of OWT.

CONCLUSIONS:

The OWT from presentation to treatment of CRC in Manitoba steadily increased between 2001 and 2005, mostly due to diagnostic delays.     

Safety of Gastroenterologist-Guided Sedation with Propofol for Upper Gastrointestinal Therapeutic Endoscopy in Elderly Patients Compared with Younger Patients

Background/Aims

Propofol sedation for elderly patients during time-consuming endoscopic procedures is controversial. Therefore, we investigated the safety of using propofol in elderly patients during upper gastrointestinal therapeutic endoscopy.

Methods

The medical records of 160 patients who underwent therapeutic endoscopic procedures under gastroenterologist-guided propofol sedation at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. The subjects were divided into two groups: a younger group, patients <75 years old; and an elderly group, patients ≥75 years old. The two groups were compared with respect to the therapeutic regimen, circulatory dynamics, and presence/absence of discontinuation of propofol treatment.

Results

Although the number of patients with liver dysfunction was higher in the elderly group, there were no other significant differences in the baseline characteristics, including the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, between the elderly and younger groups. The average maintenance rate of continuous propofol infusion was lower in the elderly patients. No statistically significant differences were found in the occurrence of adverse events between the elderly and younger groups. None of the patients returned to a resedated state after the initial recovery from sedation.

Conclusions

Gastroenterologist-guided propofol sedation in elderly patients can be safely achieved in the same manner as that in younger patients, even for time-consuming upper gastrointestinal therapeutic endoscopic procedures.     

Patient satisfaction with the endoscopy experience and willingness to return in a central Canadian health region

OBJECTIVE:

Patient experiences with endoscopy visits within a large central Canadian health region were evaluated to determine the relationship between the visit experience and the patients’ willingness to return for future endoscopy, and to identify the factors associated with patients’ willingness to return.

METHODS:

A self-report survey was distributed to 1200 consecutive individuals undergoing an upper and/or lower gastrointestinal endoscopy at any one of the six hospital-based endoscopy facilities in the region. The Spearman correlation coefficient was used to assess the association between the patients’ overall rating of the visits and willingness to return for repeat procedures under similar medical circumstances. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the factors associated with willingness to return for repeat endoscopy and overall satisfaction (rating) of the visit.

RESULTS:

A total of 529 (44%) individuals returned the questionnaire, with 45% rating the visit as excellent and 56% indicating they were extremely likely to return for repeat endoscopy. There was a low moderate correlation between overall rating of the visit and patients’ willingness to return for repeat endoscopy (r=0.30). The factors independently associated with patient willingness to return for repeat endoscopy included perceived technical skills of the endoscopists (OR 2.7 [95% CI 1.3 to 5.5]), absence of pain during the procedure (OR 2.2 [95% CI 1.3 to 3.6]) and history of previous endoscopy (OR 2.4 [95% CI 1.4 to 4.1]). In contrast, the independent factors associated with the overall rating of the visit included information provided pre- and postprocedure, wait time before and on the day of the visit, and the physical environment.

CONCLUSIONS:

To facilitate patient return for needed endoscopy, it is important to assess patients’ willingness to return because positive behavioural intent is not simply a function of satisfaction with the visit.     

Epidemiological aspects of respiratory symptoms treated in the emergency room of a tertiary care hospital

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate the prevalence of respiratory symptoms as the motive for emergency room visits by adult and pediatric patients, describing the major clinical syndromes diagnosed and the outcomes of the patients.

METHODS:

A cross-sectional study conducted in the emergency room of a tertiary care university hospital. Between November of 2008 and November of 2009, we reviewed the total number of emergency room visits per day. Children and adults who presented with at least one respiratory symptom were included in the study. The electronic medical records were reviewed, and the major characteristics of the patients were recorded.

RESULTS:

During the study period, there were 37,059 emergency room visits, of which 11,953 (32.3%) were motivated by respiratory symptoms. The prevalence of emergency room visits due to respiratory symptoms was 28.7% and 38.9% among adults and children, respectively. In adults, the rates of hospitalization and mortality were 21.2% and 2.7%, respectively, compared with 11.9% and 0.3%, respectively, in children. Among the adults, the time from symptom onset to emergency room visit correlated positively with the need for hospitalization (p < 0.0001), the length of the hospital stay (p < 0.0001), and the mortality rate (p = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS:

We found a high prevalence of respiratory symptoms as the motive for emergency room visits by adult and pediatric patients. Our results could inform decisions regarding the planning of prevention measures. Further epidemiological studies are needed in order to clarify the risk factors for severe respiratory symptoms.     

Integrated interdisciplinary care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease reduces emergency department visits and admissions: A quality assurance study

BACKGROUND:

Dedicated programs for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can reduce hospitalizations and improve quality of life.

OBJECTIVE:

To investigate whether health care utilization could be reduced by a newly developed integrated, interdisciplinary initiative that included a COPD nurse navigator who educates patients and families, transitions patients through various points of care and integrates services.

METHODS:

The present quality assurance, pre-post study included patients followed by a COPD nurse navigator from January 25, 2010 to November 5, 2011. Information regarding emergency department visits and hospitalizations, including lengths of stay, were obtained from hospital databases. Diagnoses were classified as respiratory or nonrespiratory, and used primary and secondary hospitalization diagnoses to identify acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD). Paired sign tests were performed.

RESULTS:

The sample consisted of 202 patients. Following nurse navigator intervention, significantly more patients experienced a decrease in the number of respiratory-cause emergency department visits (P<0.05), number of respiratory hospitalizations (P<0.001), total hospital days for respiratory admissions (P<0.001), number of hospitalizations with AECOPD (P<0.001) and total hospital days for admissions with AECOPD (P<0.001). Financial modelling estimated annual savings in excess of $260,000.

CONCLUSION:

The present quality assurance study indicated that the implementation of an integrated interdisciplinary program for the care of patients with COPD can improve patient outcomes despite the tendency of COPD to worsen over time.     

Indicators of safety compromise in gastrointestinal endoscopy

INTRODUCTION:

The importance of quality indicators has become increasingly recognized in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patient safety requires the identification and monitoring of occurrences associated with harm or the potential for harm. The identification of relevant indicators of safety compromise is, therefore, a critical element that is key to the effective implementation of endoscopy quality improvement programs.

OBJECTIVE:

To identify key indicators of safety compromise in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHODS:

The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Safety and Quality Indicators in Endoscopy Consensus Group was formed to address issues of quality in endoscopy. A subcommittee was formed to identify key safety indicators. A systematic literature review was undertaken, and articles pertinent to safety in endoscopy were identified and reviewed. All complications and measures used to document safety were recorded. From this, a preliminary list of 16 indicators was compiled and presented to the 35-person consensus group during a three-day meeting. A revised list of 20 items was subsequently put to the consensus group for vote for inclusion on the final list of safety indicators. Items were retained only if the consensus group highly agreed on their importance.

RESULTS:

A total of 19 indicators of safety compromise were retained and grouped into the three following categories: medication-related – the need for CPR, use of reversal agents, hypoxia, hypotension, hypertension, sedation doses in patients older than 70 years of age, allergic reactions and laryngospasm/bronchospasm; procedure-related early – perforation, immediate postpolypectomy bleeding, need for hospital admission or transfer to emergency department from the gastroenterology unit, instrument impaction, severe persistent abdominal pain requiring evaluation proven to not be perforation; and procedure-related delayed – death within 30 days of procedure, 14-day unplanned hospitalization, 14-day unplanned contact with a health provider, gastrointestinal bleeding within 14 days of procedure, infection or symptomatic metabolic complications.

CONCLUSIONS:

The 19 indicators of safety compromise in endoscopy, identified by a rigorous, evidence-based consensus process, provide clear outcomes to be recorded by all facilities as part of their continuing quality improvement programs.     

Does Anxiety or Waiting Time Influence Patients' Tolerance of Upper Endoscopy?

Background/Aims:

Endoscopy is an essential and very commonly used procedure for the evaluation of a multitude of gastrointestinal symptoms. Although it is increasingly required, patients often wait on arrival at the endoscopy unit until they are called for the procedure. It is not clear whether or not this waiting time may have an impact on patient''s tolerance during upper endoscopy. Our study attempts to address this.

Patients and Methods:

We studied consecutive outpatients who underwent endoscopy from September to December, 2013. Gender, age, body mass index (BMI), previous endoscopic experiences, antidepressant therapy, and the time interval between arrival at the endoscopy unit and the onset of examination was recorded. Anxiety before the procedure, pain, and discomfort were rated by a numeric rating scale (0 = no pain/discomfort encountered to 10 = extremely painful/uncomfortable).

Results:

One hundred and five consecutive outpatients (male = 52; mean age = 45.3 years; age range = 20–86 years) were included in the study. The mean BMI was 25 ± 4.8; mean waiting time from registration to the procedure was  172 min (time range = 30 - 375 mins). Mean patients'' pre-examination anxiety level was 3 ± 3.84, mean discomfort score was 4.3 ± 3.09 and mean pain score was 3.4 ± 3.03. The level of pain and discomfort was significantly higher in patients with higher levels of pre-procedure anxiety. No differences were found in terms of anxiety, pain and discomfort among patients divided according to waiting time.

Conclusions:

According to our data, waiting time does not have a significant impact on the perception of pain and discomfort related to the endoscopic procedure. On the other hand, high pre-procedural levels of anxiety were associated with a low tolerance. Further multicenter randomized trials are needed to clarify the impact of waiting time.     

Radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma as a bridge to liver transplantation

Background

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is widely utilized as a bridge to liver transplant with limited evidence to support efficacy. The purpose of the present study was to measure the effect of RFA on time to drop-off in HCC-listed patients.

Methods

Patients with Milan criteria tumours listed between January 1999 and June 2007 were stratified into RFA (n = 77) and No Treatment groups (n = 93).

Results

The primary effectiveness of RFA was 83% (complete radiographic response). RFA was associated with a longer median wait time to transplant (9.5 vs. 5 months). Tumour-specific drop-off events were equivalent between RFA (21%) and No Treatment (12%) groups (P = 0.11). Controlling for wait time, there was no difference in overall (P = 0.56) or tumour-specific drop-off (P = 0.94). Furthermore, there were no differences in 5-year overall or tumour-free survivals from list date or transplant. Using multivariate analysis, the likelihood of receiving a transplant and patient survivals were associated with tumour characteristics (AFP, tumour number and size) and not with bridge therapy or waiting time.

Discussion

RFA allows patients to be maintained longer on the waiting list without negative consequences on drop-off or survival compared with no treatment. Post-transplant outcomes are affected more by tumour characteristics than RFA or wait time.     

Presentation and management of pediatric orbital cellulitis

BACKGROUND:

Orbital cellulitis is a serious, vision-threatening infection.

OBJECTIVE:

To review the epidemiology and clinical data of pediatric orbital cellulitis in Manitoba.

METHODS:

A 12-year retrospective review was conducted of all children (younger than 18 years of age) with orbital cellulitis admitted to Manitoba’s only tertiary pediatric centre. Admission rates for orbital cellulitis were compared over three distinct time periods, based on licensure and funding levels of the heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) in Manitoba.

RESULTS:

Thirty-eight patients with orbital cellulitis were identified. Of these, 11% were of Aboriginal ethnicity in contrast with 30% to 40% of children who were admitted for other respiratory illnesses. Subperiosteal abscesses occurred in 31.5%. Only eight patients (21%) required surgery. Follow-up imaging after presentation usually did not indicate a need for subsequent surgical drainage. The mean number of orbital cellulitis cases per 1000 admissions for the following periods – before PCV7 licensure, after licensure and before full provincial funding, and after licensure and full funding – were 0.39, 0.53 and 0.90, respectively. No significant difference was noted among any of the periods as PCV7 coverage increased.

CONCLUSIONS:

The rate of subperiosteal abscesses was lower than other reports. This may be due to the median age at presentation. In contrast to admissions for most other respiratory infections at the Winnipeg Children’s Hospital (Winnipeg, Manitoba), Aboriginal ethnicity was uncommon. Surprisingly, rates of admissions for orbital cellulitis appeared to show an increasing trend with increasing access to PCV7 in Manitoba, although overall the number of cases was very small. Studies into the changing microbiology of orbital cellulitis and sinusitis are warranted.     

A prospective audit of patient experiences in colonoscopy using the Global Rating Scale: a cohort of 1,187 patients

BACKGROUND:

The Global Rating Scale (GRS) comprehensively evaluates the quality of an endoscopy department, providing a patient-centred framework for service improvement.

OBJECTIVE:

To assess patient experiences during colonoscopy and identify areas that need service improvement using the GRS.

METHODS:

Consecutive outpatients undergoing colonoscopy were asked to complete a pre- and postprocedure questionnaire. Questions were based on GRS items and a literature review. The preprocedure questionnaire addressed items such as patient characteristics and information provision. The postprocedure questionnaire contained questions regarding comfort, sedation, the attitude of endoscopy staff and aftercare.

RESULTS:

The preprocedure questionnaire was completed by 1187 patients, whereas the postprocedure part of the questionnaire was completed by 851 patients (71.9%). Fifty-four per cent of patients were first seen in the outpatient clinic. The indication for colonoscopy was explained to 85% of the patients. Sixty-five per cent of the patients stated that information about the risks of colonoscopy was provided. Sedation was used in 94% of the patients; however, 23% judged the colonoscopy to be more uncomfortable than expected. Ten per cent of patients rated the colonoscopy as (very) uncomfortable. Preliminary results of the colonoscopy were discussed with 87% of patients after the procedure. Twenty-one per cent of the patients left the hospital without knowing how to obtain their final results. Being comfortable while waiting for the procedure (OR 9.93) and a less uncomfortable procedure than expected (OR 2.99) were important determinants of the willingness to return for colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS:

The present study provided evidence supporting the GRS in identifyng service gaps in the quality of patient experiences for colonoscopy in a North American setting. Assessing experiences is useful in identifying areas that need improvement such as the provision of pre- and postprocedure information.     

Current status of core and advanced adult gastrointestinal endoscopy training in Canada: Survey of existing accredited programs

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the current status of core and advanced adult gastroenterology training in Canada.

METHODS:

A survey consisting of 20 questions pertaining to core and advanced endoscopy training was circulated to 14 accredited adult gastroenterology residency program directors. For continuous variables, median and range were analyzed; for categorical variables, percentage and associated 95% CIs were analyzed.

RESULTS:

All 14 programs responded to the survey. The median number of core trainees was six (range four to 16). The median (range) procedural volumes for gastroscopy, colonoscopy, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and sigmoidoscopy, respectively, were 400 (150 to 1000), 325 (200 to 1500), 15 (zero to 250) and 60 (25 to 300). Eleven of 13 (84.6%) programs used endoscopy simulators in their curriculum. Eight of 14 programs (57%) provided a structured advanced endoscopy training fellowship. The majority (88%) offered training of combined endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasonography. The median number of positions offered yearly for advanced endoscopy fellowship was one (range one to three). The median (range) procedural volumes for ERCP, endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic mucosal resection, respectively, were 325 (200 to 750), 250 (80 to 400) and 20 (10 to 63). None of the current programs offered training in endoscopic submucosal dissection or natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery.

CONCLUSION:

Most accredited adult Canadian gastroenterology programs met the minimal procedural requirements recommended by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology during core training. However, a more heterogeneous experience has been observed for advanced training. Additional studies would be required to validate and standardize evaluation tools used during gastroenterology curricula.     

Wait times for sleep apnea care in Ontario: A multidisciplinary assessment

BACKGROUND:

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a highly prevalent disorder that is associated with significant patient morbidity and societal burden. In general, wait times for health care in Ontario are believed to be lengthy; however, many diseases lack specific corroborative wait time data.

OBJECTIVE:

To characterize wait times for OSA care in Ontario.

METHODS:

Cross-sectional survey. A survey tool was designed and validated to question physicians involved in OSA care about the length of the wait times their patients experience while traversing a simplified model of OSA care. The survey was sent to all otolaryngologists and respirologists in the province, as well as to a random sample of provincial family physicians.

RESULTS:

Patients waited a mean of 11.6 months to initiate medical therapy (continuous positive airway pressure), and 16.2 months to initiate surgical therapy. Sleep laboratory availability appeared to be the major restriction in the patient management continuum, with each additional sleep laboratory in a community associated with a 20% decrease in overall wait times. Smaller community sizes were paradoxically associated with shorter wait times for sleep studies (P<0.01) but longer wait times for OSA surgery (P<0.05). Regression analysis yielded an r² of 0.046; less than 5% of the wait time variance could be explained by the simplified model.

CONCLUSION:

Patients experienced considerable wait times when undergoing management for OSA. This has implications for both individual patient care and public health in general.