Primary care physician attitudes toward endoscopic screening for GERD symptoms and unsedated esophagoscopy

Dutch, UK and US professionals' perceptions of screening for Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma: a concept mapping study

BACKGROUND

Novel, less-invasive technologies to screen for Barrett's esophagus (BE) may enable a paradigm shift in early detection strategies for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Understanding professionals' perspectives on screening is important to determine how to proceed. We aimed to explore and compare professionals' perceptions of screening for BE and EAC screening in three countries.

METHODS

In this study, 29 Dutch, 20 British and 18 American health care professionals (clinicians, researchers and policy makers) participated in concept mapping: a mixed-methods consensus building methodology. Statements on perceived barriers, facilitators, advantages, disadvantages, implications or worries associated with screening for BE and EAC were collected in asynchronous digital brainstorm sessions. Subsequently, participants sorted the statements into groups according to thematic similarity and assessed the relevance of each statement in evaluating the acceptability of BE and EAC screening. Multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis were used to map the associations between generated statements.

RESULTS

Professionals across three countries identified eight consistent themes that relate to their perceptions of screening for BE and EAC: (1) Benefits, (2) Harms, (3) Clinical effectiveness concerns, (4) Screening population, (5) Screening modality, (6) Resources, (7) Ownership, and (8) Public communication. Dutch and American professionals prioritized the potential health benefits of screening but also questioned clinical impact. In contrast, British participants prioritized identification of the screening population and suitable test.

CONCLUSIONS

Most professionals see potential in less-invasive screening tests for BE and EAC but underline the need to define the target screening population and determine benefits and harms before widely employing them. Successful implementation will require thoughtful consideration of the involvement of general practitioners, readiness of endoscopy and pathology services, balanced public communication, and country-specific regulations.

Professionals' views on the justification for esophageal adenocarcinoma screening: A systematic literature search and qualitative analysis

Screening for early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), including screening for its precursor Barrett's esophagus (BE), has the potential to reduce EAC-related mortality and morbidity. This literature review aimed to explore professionals' views on the justification for EAC screening. A systematic search of Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and PsycInfo, from January 1, 2000 to September 22, 2022, identified 5 original studies and 63 expert opinion articles reporting professionals' perspectives on EAC screening. Included articles were qualitatively analyzed using the framework method, which was deductively led by modernized screening principles. The analyses showed that many professionals are optimistic about technological advancements in BE detection and treatment. However, views on whether the societal burden of EAC merits screening were contradictory. In addition, knowledge of the long-term benefits and risks of EAC screening is still considered insufficient. There is no consensus on who to screen, how often to screen, which screening test to use, and how to manage non-dysplastic BE. Professionals further point out the need to develop technology that facilitates automated test sample processing and public education strategies that avoid causing disproportionately high cancer worry and social stigma. In conclusion, modernized screening principles are currently insufficiently fulfilled to justify widespread screening for EAC. Results from future clinical screening trials and risk prediction modeling studies may shift professionals' thoughts regarding justification for EAC screening.

Low Prevalence of Endoscopic Screening for Barrett's Esophagus in a Screening-Eligible Primary Care Population

INTRODUCTION

Despite societal recommendations supporting Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening, it is unknown what proportion of eligible patients is screened in primary care. We assessed the proportion of BE screening- eligible patients evaluated in the primary care setting receiving upper esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and identified factors associated with undergoing EGD.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of BE screening-eligible patients, as defined by the American College of Gastroenterology's BE guidelines, in a multipractice healthcare network consisting of 64 internal medicine practices and 94 family medicine (FM) practices. The proportion undergoing EGD, prevalence of BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in this group, and patient and provider factors associated with undergoing EGD were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors of undergoing EGD.

RESULTS

Of 1,127 screening-eligible patients, the mean age was 65.2 ± 8.6 years; 45% were obese; and 61% were smokers. Seventy-three percent were seeing FM; 94% were on proton pump inhibitors; and 44% took ≥1 gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) medication. Only 39% of patients (n = 436) had undergone EGD. The overall prevalence of BE or EAC was 9.9%. Of 39 (9%) referred for BE screening as the primary indication, BE/EAC prevalence was 35.1%. Factors associated with increased odds of having EGD were symptomatic GERD despite treatment (odds ratio [OR] 12.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 9.1-16.3), being on ≥1 GERD medication (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0-1.9), and being an FM patient (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.1).

DISCUSSION

In this large, primary care population, only 39% of screening-eligible patients underwent EGD. Most of the examinations were triggered by refractory symptoms rather than screening referrals, highlighting a need for improved dissemination and implementation of BE screening.

Comparative quality assessment of esophageal examination with transnasal and sedated endoscopy

Background Unsedated transnasal esophagoscopy (TNE) may offer a less expensive, mobile alternative to sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for evaluations of reflux related complications. Comparisons of imaging quality by these methods are lacking. Methods Two reviewers evaluated videos of TNE and EGD procedures, performed during a community randomized study comparing endoscopic techniques. Subjects were randomized to EGD, TNE in endoscopy suite, or TNE in mobile research unit. Endoscopic quality was assessed using a validated scoring tool. Results In total, 115 videos (58 EGD, 28 endoscopy suite TNE, and 29 mobile TNE) were reviewed. Overall quality scores for TNE and EGD were excellent without a statistically significant difference (P = 0.30). There were no differences in gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) visualization scores, though EGD scored higher in esophageal passage (P < 0.05) and TNE scored higher in esophageal intubation (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in any quality score between mobile TNE and gastrointestinal suite TNE. Conclusion Esophageal assessment with TNE or EGD was comparable in overall quality and GEJ visualization. TNE quality was not affected by procedure location. TNE is a feasible option for endoscopic assessment of reflux complications.

Transnasal endoscopy: no gagging no panic!

BACKGROUND

Transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is performed with an ultrathin scope via the nasal passages and is increasingly used. This review covers the technical characteristics, tolerability, safety and acceptability of TNE and also diagnostic accuracy, use as a screening tool and therapeutic applications. It includes practical advice from an ear, nose, throat (ENT) specialist to optimise TNE practice, identify ENT pathology and manage complications.

METHODS

A Medline search was performed using the terms "transnasal", "ultrathin", "small calibre", "endoscopy", "EGD" to identify relevant literature.

RESULTS

There is increasing evidence that TNE is better tolerated than standard endoscopy as measured using visual analogue scales, and the main area of discomfort is nasal during insertion of the TN endoscope, which seems remediable with adequate topical anaesthesia. The diagnostic yield has been found to be similar for detection of Barrett's oesophagus, gastric cancer and GORD-associated diseases. There are some potential issues regarding the accuracy of TNE in detecting small early gastric malignant lesions, especially those in the proximal stomach. TNE is feasible and safe in a primary care population and is ideal for screening for upper gastrointestinal pathology. It has an advantage as a diagnostic tool in the elderly and those with multiple comorbidities due to fewer adverse effects on the cardiovascular system. It has significant advantages for therapeutic procedures, especially negotiating upper oesophageal strictures and insertion of nasoenteric feeding tubes.

CONCLUSIONS

TNE is well tolerated and a valuable diagnostic tool. Further evidence is required to establish its accuracy for the diagnosis of early and small gastric malignancies. There is an emerging role for TNE in therapeutic endoscopy, which needs further study.

Development of a program to train physician extenders to perform transnasal esophagoscopy and screen for Barrett's esophagus

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Screening for Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma is not recommended because it was not found to be cost effective. However, physician extenders (PEs) are able to perform unsedated procedures; their involvement might reduce the costs of BE screening. We examined the feasibility of training PEs to independently perform transnasal esophagoscopy (TNE) and screen patients for BE and measured their learning curve.

METHODS

Two PEs at a Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center underwent a structured didactic training program and observed nasopharyngoscopies before performing TNE under the supervision of attending endoscopists. Individual technical and cognitive components of TNE were rated on a 9-point structured scale. Learning curves were constructed using cumulative summation. Once the PEs were judged to be technically competent, each PE performed 10 independent videotaped TNEs, which were graded.

RESULTS

Both PEs identified anatomic landmarks after 18 consecutive procedures. PE1 and PE2 performed satisfactory nasal intubations after 20 and 25 procedures and esophageal intubations after 29 and 35 procedures, respectively. They acquired overall competence after supervised training on 43 and 47 procedures, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a program at a VA medical center to train PEs to perform TNE to screen for BE. The PEs were able to perform TNE and recognize esophageal landmarks independently after a modest number of supervised procedures.

Feasibility, safety, acceptability, and yield of office-based, screening transnasal esophagoscopy (with video)

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic screening for esophageal neoplasia can identify patients eligible for early intervention for precancerous lesions. Unsedated transnasal esophagoscopy may provide an efficient and accurate endoscopic assessment with fewer risks and less cost, compared with conventional upper endoscopy.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility, safety, acceptability, and yield of unsedated transnasal esophagoscopy in a primary care population.

DESIGN

Multicenter, prospective, cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Two outpatient tertiary-care centers.

PATIENTS

This study involved a general medical clinic population aged between 40 and 85 years.

INTERVENTION

Unsedated, office-based transnasal esophagoscopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Procedure yield; completeness of examination; procedure length; adverse events and complications; choking, gagging, pain, or anxiety during the examination; and overall tolerability.

RESULTS

A total of 426 participants (mean [± standard deviation] age 55.8 ± 9.5 years; 43% male) enrolled in the study, and 422 (99%) completed the examination. Mean (± standard deviation) examination time was 3.7 ± 1.8 minutes. There were no serious adverse events, and 12 participants (2.8%) reported minor complications. Participants reported minimal choking, gagging, pain, or anxiety. The examination was well-tolerated by most participants. Overall, 38% of participants had an esophageal finding that changed management (34% erosive esophagitis, 4% Barrett's esophagus).

LIMITATIONS

Nonrandomized study, tertiary-care centers only, self-selected population with a large proportion reporting esophageal symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Unsedated transnasal esophagoscopy is a feasible, safe, and well-tolerated method to screen for esophageal disease in a primary care population. Endoscopic findings are common in this patient population.

[Study of the clinical profile and management of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease in primary care in Spain]

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical profile and management of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in primary care.

METHODS

A multinational, multicenter study was performed comprising a 4-month retrospective phase for the screening, selection and assessment of patients who had consulted for any GERD-related cause (index visit), and a cross-sectional phase in which clinical data were recorded and the following questionnaires were administered: the Reflux Disease Questionnaire and the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Impact Scale (GIS).

RESULTS

Among the 24 participating Spanish centers, 2.7% of the patients (95% CI: 2.6-2.9) had consulted at least once because of GERD. Approximately 50% of the patients showed frequent (2 or more days a week) or moderate to severe symptoms of heartburn, acid regurgitation or chest pain. Although the patients received effective pharmacological treatment at the index visit, clinically relevant GERD symptoms persisted in 16% after a median follow-up of 5 months. These symptoms were associated with a strong disease impact as evaluated with the GIS.

CONCLUSION

GERD represents a substantial burden for primary care physicians. Although effective drugs are used for the treatment of this condition, clinically relevant symptoms persist in a substantial proportion of patients.

GERD-related health care utilization, therapy, and reasons for transfer of GERD patients between primary care providers and gastroenterologists in a US managed care setting

PURPOSE

Patient flow between primary care physicians and gastroenterologists in the continuum of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) care is poorly understood. Using administrative claims data from a large US health plan linked with data abstracted from medical records, we examined: health care resource utilization for GERD subjects treated by primary care physicians (PCPs) and gastroenterologists (GEs), determinants of GERD subject transfer between these physician types, and reasons for GERD therapy change.

RESULTS

Within a sample of 169,884 patients, 211,043 PCP-based episodes of care and 40,304 GE-based episodes of care were developed. In unadjusted comparisons, GE episodes were characterized by more endoscopic procedures, on average (50.5/100 episodes), compared with PCP episodes (6.3/100, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that patients with esophagitis had 57.3% higher odds (P < 0.01) of transfer from PCP to GE compared with patients without esophagitis; patients with esophageal stricture had 98.6% higher odds (P < 0.01) of PCP-GE transfer. Patients with endoscopy during a first GE episode had 32.2% higher odds of transfer to a PCP (P < 0.01). The principal reasons for change in GERD therapy were no change or worsening of symptoms (51.7% of PCP charts; 9.5% of GE charts) and lack of response to therapy (51.7% of PCP charts, 26.2% of GE charts).

CONCLUSION

Resource utilization varies greatly based on the physician's specialty. We infer that timely transfer of GERD patients to gastroenterologists when empiric treatment is insufficient may lead to more efficient clinical management.

Management of gastroesophageal reflux disease in primary care settings in Spain: SYMPATHY I study

OBJECTIVE

Our study was designed to assess the symptom loads, treatment strategies, and impact on daily life of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms who consulted primary care (PC) health care providers in Spain.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, observational, cross-sectional study in a sample of 5735 consecutive patients visiting PC clinics with GERD symptoms. Participating primary care physicians (PCPs) collected clinical data by using a questionnaire, and completed a survey on their perceptions of diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to GERD. Patients self-completed the GERD Impact Scale during the study visit.

RESULTS

In the week before visiting the PC clinic, typical GERD symptoms were present in a majority of patients (89.6% heartburn and 81.6% regurgitation), but extraesophageal symptoms were also frequent (55.6% reflux-related sleep disturbances, 45.7% noncardiac chest pain, 30.8% chronic cough, and 24.7% hoarseness), these being more prevalent in the patients diagnosed earlier. Although primary care physicians considered that 55.9% of the patients could be diagnosed on the basis of symptoms without further investigation, in their practice only one-third of new diagnoses of GERD and 71.1% of those already diagnosed were symptom-managed. Upon arrival at the clinic, patients with GERD symptoms were taking the following medications: 28.1% (47.8% in the case of those already diagnosed) proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), 16.6% antacids, 6.1% H2 antagonists, and 4.5% prokinetics. Most patients (90.2%) were treated with PPIs after the study visit. The evaluation of agreement between physicians and patients on the severity of GERD resulted in a kappa index of 0.19.

CONCLUSION

There is a high occurrence of typical and extraesophageal symptoms in patients in Spain complaining of GERD symptoms in PC settings. Two-thirds of new GERD patients were referred for further investigation. PPIs were the treatment prescribed in almost all cases. The degree of agreement between physicians and patients about the severity of the symptoms was limited.

Tethered capsule endoscopy, a low-cost and high-performance alternative technology for the screening of esophageal cancer and Barrett's esophagus

Esophageal cancer is currently the fastest growing cancer in the United States. To help combat the recent rise in morbidity, our laboratory has developed a low-cost tethered capsule endoscope system (TCE) aimed at improving early detection of esophageal cancer. The TCE contains a resonant fiberoptic laser scanner (1.6 mm O.D.) which fits into 6.4-mm easy-to-swallow capsule at the distal tip. The tethered portion contains a single mode optical fiber multiplexed to three laser diodes at the proximal end. This design offers two main advantages over current endoscope technology. First, because of its small size, the TCE can be swallowed with minimal patient discomfort, thereby obviating sedation. Second, by imaging via directed laser light, the TCE is strategically positioned to employ several burgeoning laser-based diagnostic technologies, such as narrow-band, hyperspectral, and fluorescence imaging. It is believed that the combination of such imaging techniques with novel biomarkers of dysplasia will greatly assist in identifying precancerous conditions such as Barrett's esophagus (BE). As the probe is swallowed, the fiber scanner captures high resolution, wide-field color images of the gastroesophageal junction (500 lines at 0.05-mm resolution) currently at 15-Hz frame rate. Video images are recorded as the capsule is slowly retracted by its tether. Accompanying software generates panoramic images from the video output by mosaicing individual frames to aid in pattern recognition. This initial report describes the rationale for the unique TCE system design, results from preliminary testing in vitro and in vivo, and discussion on the merits of this new platform technology as a basis for developing a low-cost screening program for esophageal cancer.

Ultrathin esophagoscopy in screening for Barrett's esophagus at a Veterans Administration Hospital: easy access does not lead to referrals

OBJECTIVE

Unsedated, ultrathin esophagoscopy has been shown to be tolerable, safe, and accurate. Survey data have suggested that accessibility of unsedated esophagoscopy would increase referrals for Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening. Our purpose was to evaluate primary-care physician referrals for BE screening when unsedated esophagoscopy is made available.

METHODS

We studied primary-care referrals for unsedated esophagoscopy in a VA internal medicine clinic. Patients over age 45 with chronic heartburn for >5 yr or >3 times weekly and who had no previous EGD were eligible for screening with unsedated esophagoscopy. All primary providers received a 15-min education session on screening. Baseline referral rate was determined retrospectively. Longitudinal data were then collected during three phases of the study: (a) primary provider-initiated referrals, (b) primary provider-initiated referrals with weekly reminders from investigators, and (c) investigator recruitment.

RESULTS

Baseline referral rate averaged 0.5 patients per month. Availability of unsedated esophagoscopy and an education session increased the rate of referral to 0.66 patients per month. Weekly reminders to primary physicians further increased the rate to 1.33 referrals per month. Investigator recruitment produced a rate of 2.67 referrals per month. Of the 77 patients offered screening, 25 (32%) declined. Of the 52 patients screened, three (5.8%) were diagnosed with BE.

CONCLUSIONS

Accessibility of unsedated esophagoscopy itself does not lead to a large increase in the number of primary care referrals for BE screening. Factors that prevent primary care physicians from referring patients for screening need to be identified and effective interventions to change referral patterns need to be implemented for unsedated screening programs to be successful.