P490 The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gastroenterologists providing care to inflammatory bowel disease patients in Canada: preliminary data of a cross-sectional survey
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background We aim to explore the impact of COVID-19 pandemic-related restrictions on gastroenterologists providing care to inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients in Canada. Methods We invited 28 Canadian gastroenterology societies, 14 academic centres and 101 community hospitals and private clinics to have their gastroenterologists engage in an online mixed methods survey from December 2020 - March 2021. The survey explored the impact of pandemic-related restrictions on gastroenterologists managing IBD patients and the impact on clinical decision-making, rates of consultation, investigations and endoscopies conducted before and during the pandemic. Results 59 gastroenterologists (59.3% male) participated in our study with 40.7% having completed additional training in IBD. Respondents mean age was 43.7 years with 30.5% practising independently for a duration of less than or equal to 5 years. The majority of respondents were from Ontario (43.1%), Quebec (31%) and British Columbia (13.8%) with 62.7% practising primarily at an academic centre. 93.2% of respondents reported that their practice was affected by the pandemic. 44.6% note a reduction in the number of total consultations completed. Only 60% were able to arrange endoscopies for patients in an active IBD flare at an appropriate time interval compared to their pre-COVID practice. During the pandemic, 87.3% reported a reduction in the total endoscopies performed, with 43.8% of those individuals noting a minimum reduction of 25% of previous volumes. The following barriers attributed to the decrease in endoscopies performed during the pandemic: institutional-imposed restriction on daily allowed endoscopies (97.9%), indication for endoscopy was non-urgent (68.8%) and patient-requested cancellation due to a fear of contracting COVID-19 (87.5%). 63.6% of respondents were able to arrange outpatient laboratory investigations in less than 1-week prior to the pandemic vs. 41.8% arranging similar tests in 1–2 weeks during the pandemic. 50.9% were able to arrange diagnostic investigations in 1–2 months before the pandemic vs. 65% arranging similar tests in 3-months or more during the pandemic. When advancing drug therapy in IBD patients before versus during the pandemic, respondents reported the following factors as playing a crucial role in clinical decision making: patient symptomatology (87% vs. 79.3%), laboratory investigations (94.8% vs. 96.6%), diagnostic imaging (89.7% vs. 81%) and endoscopy findings (89.7% vs 72.4%). Conclusion We illustrate that Canadian gastroenterologists have been affected by the pandemic, with decreases in endoscopy performance related to access and patient preference and less decision-making guided by endoscopy. Outpatient access to urgent investigations was reduced.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».