Global Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Endoscopy: An International Survey of 252 Centers From 55 Countries.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Parasa S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7289081 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background & study aimsCorona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has markedly impacted routine medical services including gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. We aim to report the real-life performance in high volume GI endoscopy units during the pandemic.Patients and methodsA web-based survey covering all aspects of daily performance in GI endoscopy units was sent to endoscopy units worldwide. Responses were collected and data were analyzed to reveal the effect of COVID-19 pandemic on endoscopy practice.ResultsParticipants from 48 countries (n = 163) responded to the survey with response rate of 67.35%. The majority (85%) decreased procedure volume by over 50%, and four endoscopy units (2.45%) completely stopped. The top three indications for procedures included upper GI bleeding (89.6%), lower GI bleeding (65.6%) and cholangitis (62.6%). The majority (93.9%) triaged patients for COVID-19 prior to procedure. N95 masks were used in (57.1%), isolation gowns in (74.2%) and head covers in (78.5%). Most centers (65%) did not extend use of N95 masks, however 50.9% of centers reused N95 masks. Almost all (91.4%) centers used standard endoscopic decontamination and most (69%) had no negative pressure rooms. Forty-two centers (25.8%) reported positive cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients and 50 (30.7%) centers reported positive cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection among their healthcare workers.ConclusionsMost GI endoscopy centers had a significant reduction in their volume and most procedures performed were urgent. Most centers used the recommended personal protective equipment (PPE) by GI societies however there is still a possibility of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection in GI endoscopy units.
| S-EPMC7448955 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsAlthough coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected endoscopy services globally, the impact on trainees has not been evaluated. We aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on procedural volumes and on the emotional well-being of endoscopy trainees worldwide.MethodsAn international survey was disseminated over a 3-week period in April 2020. The primary outcome was the percentage reduction in monthly procedure volume before and during COVID-19. Secondary outcomes included potential variation of COVID-19 impact between different continents and rates and predictors of anxiety and burnout among trainees.ResultsAcross 770 trainees from 63 countries, 93.8% reported a reduction in endoscopy case volume. The median percentage reduction in total procedures was 99% (interquartile range, 85%-100%), which varied internationally (P < .001) and was greatest for colonoscopy procedures. Restrictions in case volume and trainee activity were common barriers. A total of 71.9% were concerned that the COVID-19 pandemic could prolonged training. Anxiety was reported in 52.4% of respondents and burnout in 18.8%. Anxiety was independently associated with female gender (odds ratio [OR], 2.15; P < .001), adequacy of personal protective equipment (OR, 1.75; P = .005), lack of institutional support for emotional health (OR, 1.67; P = .008), and concerns regarding prolongation of training (OR, 1.60; P = .013). Modifying existing national guidelines to support adequate endoscopy training during the pandemic was supported by 68.9%.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic has led to restrictions in endoscopic volumes and endoscopy training, with high rates of anxiety and burnout among endoscopy trainees worldwide. Targeted measures by training programs to address these key issues are warranted to improve trainee well-being and support trainee education.
| S-EPMC7287420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant disruptions in international communications and travel for academic global health programs (AGHPs) in both high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Given the importance of international travel and communication to AGHPs, the pandemic has likely had considerable impact on the education, research, and administrative components of these programs. To date, no substantive study has determined the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on AGHPs in HICs and LMICs. This study assessed the impacts and resultant adaptations of AGHPs to pandemic realities with the goal of sharing strategies and approaches. Methods: This study applied a mixed methods sequential explanatory design to survey AGHPs in HICs and LMICs about the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on three program domains: education, research, and administration. First, we surveyed a range of AGHP stakeholders to capture quantitative data on the pandemic’s impact. Subsequently we conducted semi-structured interviews with select survey participants to gather qualitative data expanding on specific survey responses. Data from both phases were then compared and interpreted together to develop conclusions and suggest adaptive/innovative approaches for AGHPs. Results: AGHPs in both HICs and LMICs were significantly impacted by the pandemic in all three domains, though in different ways. While education initiatives managed to adapt by pivoting towards virtual learning, research programs were impacted more negatively by the disruptions in communication and international travel. The impact of the pandemic on scholarly output as well as on funding for education and research was quite variable, although LMIC programs were more negatively impacted. Administratively, AGHPs implemented a range of safety and risk mitigation strategies and showed a low risk tolerance for international travel. The pandemic posed many challenges but also revealed opportunities for AGHPs. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted AGHPs in HICs and LMICs in expected and unexpected ways. Programs noted some unanticipated reductions in education program funding, negative impacts on research programs, and reduced scholarly output. Many programs reported well-coordinated adaptive responses to the pandemic including, for instance, virtual (in place of in-person) collaboration in research. The pandemic will likely have lasting impacts with regard to education, research collaborations, and administration of programs.
| S-EPMC9524235 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/aimsThe coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted the training of medical trainees internationally. The aim of this study was to assess the global impact of COVID-19 on endoscopy training from the perspective of endoscopy trainers and to identify strategies implemented to mitigate the impact on trainee education.MethodsTeaching faculty of gastroenterology (GI) training programs globally were invited to complete a 36-question web-based survey to report the characteristics of their training programs and the impact of COVID-19 on various aspects of endoscopy training, including what factors decisions were based on.ResultsThe survey response rate was 52.6% (305 out of 580 individuals); 92.8% reported a negative impact on endoscopy training, with suspension of elective procedures (77.1%) being the most detrimental factor. Geographic variations were noted, with European programs reporting the lowest percentage of trainee participation in procedures. A higher proportion of trainees in the Americas were allowed to continue performing procedures, and trainers from the Americas reported receiving the greatest support for endoscopy teaching.ConclusionThis study demonstrated that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant negative impact on GI endoscopy training internationally, as reported by endoscopy trainers. Focus-optimizing endoscopy training and assessment of competencies are necessary to ensure adequate endoscopy training.
| S-EPMC8505182 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a significant burden on healthcare systems causing disruption to the medical and surgical training of doctors globally.Aims and objectivesThis is the first international survey assessing the perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the training of doctors of all grades and specialties.MethodsAn online global survey was disseminated using Survey Monkey® between 4th August 2020 and 17th November 2020. A global network of collaborators facilitated participant recruitment. Data were collated anonymously with informed consent and analysed using univariate and adjusted multivariable analyses.ResultsSeven hundred and forty-three doctors of median age 27 (IQR: 25-30) were included with the majority (56.8%, n = 422) being male. Two-thirds of doctors were in a training post (66.5%, n = 494), 52.9% (n = 393) in a surgical specialty and 53.0% (n = 394) in low- and middle-income countries. Sixty-nine point two percent (n = 514) reported an overall perceived negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their training. A significant decline was noted amongst non-virtual teaching methods such as face-to-face lectures, tutorials, ward-based teaching, theatre sessions, conferences, simulation sessions and morbidity and mortality meetings (P ≤ .05). Low or middle-income country doctors' training was associated with perceived inadequate supervision while performing invasive procedures under general, local or regional anaesthetic. (P ≤ .05).ConclusionIn addition to the detrimental impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare infrastructure, this international survey reports a widespread perceived overall negative impact on medical and surgical doctors' training globally. Ongoing adaptation and innovation will be required to enhance the approach to doctors' training and learning in order to ultimately improve patient care.
| S-EPMC8237016 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesA multicentre survey was designed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 outbreak on dental practice worldwide, estimate the COVID-19 related symptoms/signs, work attitudes and behaviour and the routine use of protective measures and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).MethodsA global survey using a standardized questionnaire with research groups from 36 countries was designed. The questionnaire was developed and pretested during April 2020 and contained three domains: 1) Personal data; 2) COVID-19 positive rate and symptoms/signs presumably related to the coronavirus; 3) Working conditions and PPE adopted after the outbreak. Countries' data were grouped by the Country Positive Rate (CPR) during the survey period and by Gross-National-Income per capita. An ordinal multinomial logistic regression model was carried out with COVID-19 self-reported rate referred by dental professionals as dependent variable to assess the association with questionnaire items.ResultsA total of 52,491 questionnaires were returned with a male/female ratio of 0.63. Out of the total respondents, 7,859 dental professionals (15%) reported symptoms/signs compatible with COVID-19. More than half of the sample (n = 27,818; 53%) stated to use FFP2/N95 masks, while 21,558 (41.07%) used eye protection. In the bivariate analysis, CPR and N95/FFP2 were significantly associated (OR = 1.80 95%CI = 1.60/2.82 and OR = 5.20 95%CI = 1.44/18.80, respectively), while Gross-National-Income was not statistically associated with CPR (OR = 1.09 95%CI = 0.97/1.60). The same significant associations were observed in the multivariate analysis.ConclusionsOral health service provision has not been significantly affected by COVID-19, although access to routine dental care was reduced due to country-specific temporary lockdown periods. While the dental profession has been identified at high-risk, the reported rates of COVID-19 for dental professionals were not significantly different to those reported for the general population in each country. These findings may help to better plan oral health care for future pandemic events.
| S-EPMC8285212 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Continuing to Confront COPD International Patient Survey estimated the prevalence and burden of COPD across 12 countries. Using data from this survey we evaluated the economic impact of COPD.MethodsThis cross-sectional, population-based survey questioned 4,343 subjects aged 40 years and older, fulfilling a case definition of COPD based on self-reported physician diagnosis or symptomatology. Direct cost measures were based on exacerbations of COPD (treated and those requiring emergency department visits and/or hospitalisation), contacts with healthcare professionals, and COPD medications. Indirect costs were calculated from work loss values using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment scale. Combined direct and indirect costs estimated the total societal costs per patient.ResultsThe annual direct costs of COPD ranged from $504 (South Korea) to $9,981 (USA), with inpatient hospitalisations (5 countries) and home oxygen therapy (3 countries) being the key drivers of direct costs. The proportion of patients completely prevented from working due to their COPD ranged from 6% (Italy) to 52% (USA and UK) with 8 countries reporting this to be ?20%. Total societal costs per patient varied widely from $1,721 (Russia) to $30,826 (USA) but a consistent pattern across countries showed greater costs among those with increased burden of COPD (symptoms, health status and more severe disease) and a greater number of comorbidities.ConclusionsThe economic burden of COPD is considerable across countries, and requires targeted resources to optimise COPD management encompassing the control of symptoms, prevention of exacerbations and effective treatment of comorbidities. Strategies to allow COPD patients to remain in work are important for addressing the substantial wider societal costs.
| S-EPMC4836731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsTo investigate control measures for COVID-19 pandemic in GIE centers in China.MethodsThis is a retrospective multi-center research, including seven centers. Data collection was from 1 February to 31 March 2020 and the same period in 2019.ResultsThere were a total of 28 COVID-19 definite cases in these hospitals. Six out of seven GIE centers were arranged to shut down on 1 February, with a mean number of shutdown days of 23.6 ± 5.3. The actual workloads were only 10.3%-62.9% compared to those last year. All centers had a preoperative COVID-19 screening process. Epidemiological questionnaire, temperature taking and QR-code of journey were conducted. Chest CT scan was conducted during the shutdown period and continued in five centers after return to work. Antibody and nucleic acid test were applied in one to three centers. All endoscopists had advanced PPE. Five centers used surgical mask and the rest used N95 mask. Six centers used goggles or face shield. Five centers selected isolation gowns and the rest selected protective suits. The change frequency of these PPE was 4 h. Sterilizing measures were improved in six centers. Five centers utilized ultraviolet and six centers strengthened natural ventilation. Four and six centers used peracetic acid during the period of shutdown and return to work, alone or matched with OPA or acidified water.ConclusionsMany effective control measures were conducted in GIE centers during the outbreak, including patients' volume limitation, preoperative COVID-19 screening, advanced PPE and disinfection methods.
| S-EPMC7300959 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe widespread nature of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been unprecedented. We sought to analyze its global impact with a survey on colorectal cancer care during the pandemic.MethodsThe impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on preoperative assessment, elective surgery, and postoperative management of colorectal cancer patients was explored by a 35-item survey, which was distributed worldwide to members of surgical societies with an interest in colorectal cancer care. Respondents were divided into 2 comparator groups: (1) "delay" group: colorectal cancer care affected by the pandemic and (2) "no delay" group: unaltered colorectal cancer practice.ResultsA total of 1,051 respondents from 84 countries completed the survey. No substantial differences in demographics were found between the delay (745, 70.9%) and no delay (306, 29.1%) groups. Suspension of multidisciplinary team meetings, staff members quarantined or relocated to coronavirus disease 2019 units, units fully dedicated to coronavirus disease 2019 care, and personal protective equipment not readily available were factors significantly associated to delays in endoscopy, radiology, surgery, histopathology, and prolonged chemoradiation therapy-to-surgery intervals. In the delay group, 48.9% of respondents reported a change in the initial surgical plan, and 26.3% reported a shift from elective to urgent operations. Recovery of colorectal cancer care was associated with the status of the outbreak. Practicing in coronavirus disease-free units, no change in operative slots and staff members not relocated to coronavirus disease 2019 units were statistically associated with unaltered colorectal cancer care in the no delay group, while the geographic distribution was not.ConclusionGlobal changes in diagnostic and therapeutic colorectal cancer practices were evident. Changes were associated with differences in health care delivery systems, hospital's preparedness, resource availability, and local coronavirus disease 2019 prevalence rather than geographic factors. Strategic planning is required to optimize colorectal cancer care.
| S-EPMC7670903 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe health area being greatest impacted by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and residents' perspective to better prepare for future pandemic remain unknown. We aimed to assess and make cross-country and cross-region comparisons of the global impacts of COVID-19 and preparation preferences of pandemic.MethodsWe recruited adults in 30 countries covering all World Health Organization (WHO) regions from July 2020 to August 2021. 5 Likert-point scales were used to measure their perceived change in 32 aspects due to COVID-19 (-2 = substantially reduced to 2 = substantially increased) and perceived importance of 13 preparations (1 = not important to 5 = extremely important). Samples were stratified by age and gender in the corresponding countries. Multidimensional preference analysis displays disparities between 30 countries, WHO regions, economic development levels, and COVID-19 severity levels.Results16 512 adults participated, with 10 351 females. Among 32 aspects of impact, the most affected were having a meal at home (mean (m) = 0.84, standard error (SE) = 0.01), cooking at home (m = 0.78, SE = 0.01), social activities (m = -0.68, SE = 0.01), duration of screen time (m = 0.67, SE = 0.01), and duration of sitting (m = 0.59, SE = 0.01). Alcohol (m = -0.36, SE = 0.01) and tobacco (m = -0.38, SE = 0.01) consumption declined moderately. Among 13 preparations, respondents rated medicine delivery (m = 3.50, SE = 0.01), getting prescribed medicine in a hospital visit / follow-up in a community pharmacy (m = 3.37, SE = 0.01), and online shopping (m = 3.33, SE = 0.02) as the most important. The multidimensional preference analysis showed the European Region, Region of the Americas, Western Pacific Region and countries with a high-income level or medium to high COVID-19 severity were more adversely impacted on sitting and screen time duration and social activities, whereas other regions and countries experienced more cooking and eating at home. Countries with a high-income level or medium to high COVID-19 severity reported higher perceived mental burden and emotional distress. Except for low- and lower-middle-income countries, medicine delivery was always prioritised.ConclusionsGlobal increasing sitting and screen time and limiting social activities deserve as much attention as mental health. Besides, the pandemic has ushered in a notable enhancement in lifestyle of home cooking and eating, while simultaneously reducing the consumption of tobacco and alcohol. A health care system and technological infrastructure that facilitate medicine delivery, medicine prescription, and online shopping are priorities for coping with future pandemics.
| S-EPMC10416140 | biostudies-literature