Improving Access to Gastroenterologist Using eConsultation: A Way to Potentially Shorten Wait Times

Defining the Roles of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinical Pharmacists in the United States: A Systematic Review and National RAND/UCLA Consensus

BACKGROUND

Given the complexity of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care, utilization of multidisciplinary teams is recommended to optimize outcomes. There is a growing recognition that clinical pharmacists should be an integral part of this care model. We sought to define the roles of IBD clinical pharmacists in the United States.

METHODS

A national multidisciplinary expert panel of 12 gastroenterologists and clinical pharmacists practicing in IBD clinics was assembled. We used the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles appropriateness method, with a total of 281 statements generated based on a systematic literature review and expert opinion. Each statement was anonymously rated as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate in 2 rounds of voting.

RESULTS

The number of publications evaluating the clinical pharmacists' roles in IBD is limited, primarily focusing on thiopurine initiation and monitoring, medication adherence, and switching to biosimilars. Medication education; medication initiation and monitoring; therapeutic drug monitoring; biosimilar management; health maintenance review; and transitions of care were deemed by the panel to be appropriate roles for IBD clinical pharmacists. In considering real-world settings, IBD clinical pharmacists should practice clinically under a predefined scope and primarily focus on complex treatments (eg, immunomodulators, biologics, and small molecules). Clinical pharmacists should also be included in practice settings with IBD specialized physicians. Additionally, clinical pharmacists caring for patients with IBD should be residency trained and board certified.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus defines IBD clinical pharmacists' roles and provides a framework for embedded clinical pharmacists in IBD care.

Effect of Peer Benchmarking on Specialist Electronic Consult Performance in a Los Angeles Safety-Net: a Cluster Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Since the advent of COVID-19, accelerated adoption of systems that reduce face-to-face encounters has outpaced training and best practices. Electronic consultations (eConsults), structured communications between PCPs and specialists regarding a case, have been effective in reducing face-to-face specialist encounters. As the health system rapidly adapts to multiple new practices and communication tools, new mechanisms to measure and improve performance in this context are needed.

OBJECTIVE

To test whether feedback comparing physicians to top performing peers using co-specialists' ratings improves performance.

DESIGN

Cluster-randomized controlled trial PARTICIPANTS: Eighty facility-specialty clusters and 214 clinicians INTERVENTION: Providers in the feedback arms were sent messages that announced their membership in an elite group of "Top Performers" or provided actionable recommendations with feedback for providers that were "Not Top Performers."

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcomes were changes in peer ratings in the following performance dimensions after feedback was received: (1) elicitation of information from primary care practitioners; (2) adherence to institutional clinical guidelines; (3) agreement with peer's medical decision-making; (4) educational value; (5) relationship building.

KEY RESULTS

Specialists showed significant improvements on 3 of the 5 consultation performance dimensions: medical decision-making (odds ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.08-2.14, p<.05), educational value (1.86, 1.17-2.96) and relationship building (1.63, 1.13-2.35) (both p<.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The pandemic has shed light on clinicians' commitment to professionalism and service as we rapidly adapt to changing paradigms. Interventions that appeal to professional norms can help improve the efficacy of new systems of practice. We show that specialists' performance can be measured and improved with feedback using aspirational norms.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov NCT03784950.

Evaluation of an Electronic Consultation Service for COVID-19 Care

PURPOSE

COVID-19 has increased the need for innovative virtual care solutions. Electronic consultation (eConsult) services allow primary care practitioners to pose clinical questions to specialists using a secure remote application. We examined eConsult cases submitted to a COVID-19 specialist group in order to assess usage patterns, impact on response times and referrals, and the content of clinical questions being asked.

METHODS

This was a mixed-methods analysis of eConsult cases submitted between March and September 2020 in Ontario, Canada to 2 services. We performed a descriptive analysis of the average response time and the total time spent by the specialist for eConsults. Primary care practitioners completed a post-eConsult questionnaire that asked about the outcome of the eConsult. We performed an inductive and deductive content analysis of a subset of cases to identify common themes among the clinical questions asked.

RESULTS

A total of 208 primary care practitioners submitted 289 eConsult cases. The median specialist response time was 0.6 days (range = 3 minutes to 15 days); the average time spent by specialists per case was 16 minutes (range = 5 to 59 minutes). In 69 cases (24%), the eConsult enabled avoidance of a face-to-face referral. Content analysis of 51 cases identified 5 major themes: precautions for high-risk and special populations, diagnostic clarification and/or need for COVID-19 testing, guidance on self-isolation and return to work, guidance on personal protective equipment, and management of chronic symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the considerable potential of eConsults during a pandemic as our service was quickly implemented across Ontario and resulted in primary care practitioners' rapid and low-barrier access to specialist input.

Expanding the scope of an eConsult service: acceptability and feasibility of an optometry–ophthalmology pilot project

OBJECTIVE

To determine the feasibility and acceptability of connecting optometrists to ophthalmologists on an eConsult service.

DESIGN

Descriptive analysis of utilization data and an anonymous survey.

PARTICIPANTS

All eConsult cases sent by optometrists between March 2019 and February 2020 (utilization data); optometrists and ophthalmologists participating in the eConsult Vision Pilot Project (survey).

METHODS

Utilization data for the study period were collected automatically and underwent descriptive analysis. Participating optometrists and ophthalmologists received an email invitation to a survey assessing the project.

RESULTS

Thirteen optometrists from 5 clinics in the southeast region and 7 ophthalmologists were recruited to participate in the pilot project. Optometrists sent 109 eConsults in a 13-month period, representing 33% of all cases submitted to ophthalmology through the eConsult service provincially (March 2019-March 2020). Sixty-eight percent of respondents to an anonymous online survey valued the recruitment and engagement of eye care professionals from the same health region. The influence of the eConsult service was reported to have a "somewhat positive" (27%) to "very positive" (50%) influence on the relationship between the two professional groups.

CONCLUSION

The eConsult Vision Pilot Project fills a gap in service and provides an opportunity for patients to get access to specialty advice. We demonstrated that allowing optometrists to solicit specialist advice from ophthalmologists was acceptable and feasible.

Clinical Questions Asked by Long-Term Care Providers Through eConsult: A Retrospective Study

Introduction

eConsult allows primary care providers (PCPs) to access timely specialist advice and informs patient care. To understand the use of eConsult in long-term care (LTC) settings, we examined the clinical content and types of questions asked by LTC PCPs.

Methods

A descriptive, retrospective study of eConsults submitted through the Champlain BASE™ eConsult Service between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2018, by LTC PCPs was conducted. Cases were classified using validated taxonomies. Descriptive statistics were generated for content and question type classifications, service utilization data, and close-out survey responses.

Results

22 LTC PCPs submitted 113 eConsults. They sought advice about drug treatment (58%), diagnosis (44%), and management (38%) in a breadth of clinical areas, often skin-related (39%). Long-term care PCPs frequently asked more than one question type (42%). They received advice within 1 week (91%) and rated eConsult as very helpful and educational. Three case examples are presented.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates the type of advice LTC PCPs are seeking through eConsult and its usefulness in this setting. Long-term care stakeholders are encouraged to consider implementing eConsult in other regions, as a means to improve access to timely specialist advice, support clinical decision-making, and improve residents’ quality of life.

Effect of Integrated Gastroenterology Specialists in a Primary Care Setting: a Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal (GI) complaints are common in primary care practices. The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) may improve coordination and collaboration by facilitating coordination across healthcare settings and within the community, enhancing communication between providers, and focusing on quality of care delivery.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of integrated community gastroenterology specialists (ICS-GI) model within a large primary care practice.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort with propensity-matched historic controls.

PATIENTS

We identified 265 patients who had a visit with one of our ICS-GI specialists and matched them (1:2) to 530 similar patients seen prior to the implementation of the ICS-GI model.

MAIN MEASURES

Frequency of diagnostic testing for GI indications, visits to our outpatient GI referral practice, emergency department and hospital utilization, and time to access of specialty care for the whole population and by GI condition group.

KEY RESULTS

Patients seen in our ICS-GI model had similar outpatient care utilization (OR = 1.0, 95% CI 0.7-1.4, p = 0.90), were more likely to have visits in primary care (OR OR=1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.2, p = 0.02), and were less likely to have visits to our GI outpatient referral practice (OR = 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.7, p < 0.0001). Condition-specific analyses show that all GI conditions experienced decreased visits to the outpatient GI referral practice outside of patients with GI neoplasm. Populations did not differ in emergency department, hospital, or diagnostic utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed that an embedded specialist in primary care model is associated with improved care coordination without compromising patient safety. The PCMH could be extended to include subspecialty care.

Evaluation of an electronic consultation service for transgender care

BACKGROUND

Access to transgender care in Canada is poor. Although primary care providers are ideally positioned to initiate care, many feel uncomfortable providing transgender care. This study aimed to explore the impact of an electronic consultation (eConsult) service between primary care providers and transgender care specialists on access to care and to explore the content of clinical questions that were asked.

METHODS

This was a retrospective mixed methods analysis of 62 eConsults submitted between January 2017 and December 2018 by primary care providers to specialists in transgender care in a health region in eastern Ontario, Canada. A descriptive analysis was conducted to assess the average response time and the total time spent by the specialist for the eConsults. An inductive and deductive content analysis was carried out to identify common themes of clinical questions being asked to transgender specialists. A post-eConsult survey completed by primary care providers was assessed to gain insight into avoided face-to-face referrals and overall provider satisfaction.

RESULTS

The median specialist response time was 1.2 days (range: 1 h to 5 days) and the average time spent by specialists per eConsult was 18 min (range: 10 to 40 min). The qualitative analysis identified six major themes: 1) interpretation/management of abnormal bloodwork, 2) change in management due to lack of desired effect/hormone levels not a target, 3) initiation of hormone therapy/initial work up, 4) management of adverse effects of hormone therapy, 5) transition related surgery counseling and post-op complications, and 6) management of patients with comorbidities. Approximately one-third of eConsults resulted in an avoided face-to-face referral and 95% of primary care providers rated the value of their eConsult as a 5 (excellent value) or 4.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that a transgender eConsult service has potential to significantly improve access to care for transgender patients. Given the importance that timely access has on improving mental health and reducing suicide attempts, eConsult has the potential to make a substantial clinical impact on this population. Identified themes of eConsult questions provides insight into potential gaps in knowledge amongst primary care providers that could help inform future continuing education events.

Electronic consultations (E-consults) and their outcomes: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Electronic consultations (e-consults) are clinician-to-clinician communications that may obviate face-to-face specialist visits. E-consult programs have spread within the US and internationally despite limited data on outcomes. We conducted a systematic review of the recent peer-reviewed literature on the effect of e-consults on access, cost, quality, and patient and clinician experience and identified the gaps in existing research on these outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched 4 databases for empirical studies published between 1/1/2015 and 2/28/2019 that reported on one or more outcomes of interest. Two investigators reviewed titles and abstracts. One investigator abstracted information from each relevant article, and another confirmed the abstraction. We applied the GRADE criteria for the strength of evidence for each outcome.

RESULTS

We found only modest empirical evidence for effectiveness of e-consults on important outcomes. Most studies are observational and within a single health care system, and comprehensive assessments are lacking. For those outcomes that have been reported, findings are generally positive, with mixed results for clinician experience. These findings reassure but also raise concern for publication bias.

CONCLUSION

Despite stakeholder enthusiasm and encouraging results in the literature to date, more rigorous study designs applied across all outcomes are needed. Policy makers need to know what benefits may be expected in what contexts, so they can define appropriate measures of success and determine how to achieve them.

Current and future implications of COVID-19 on gastroenterology training and clinical practice

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected almost every country on the globe, affecting 185 countries with more than 2.6 million cases and 182,000 deaths as of April 22, 2020. The United States (US) has seen an exponential surge in the COVID-19 patients and has become the epicentre with more than 845,000 confirmed cases and 46,000 deaths. The governments and healthcare providers all over the world are racing with time to reduce the rate of increase in active cases by social distancing to flatten the curve of this pandemic. Practicing gastroenterologists are facing multiple challenges in the safe practice of medicine because of patient's inability to visit physicians' offices, endoscopy centers and the threat of potential virus spread through gastrointestinal secretions by endoscopies in emergent cases. The gastroenterological associations from Europe and North America have made position statements to guide gastroenterologists to navigate through the clinical practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Gastroenterology fellows are on the frontlines during the COVID-19 pandemic, experiencing personal, physical and economic stresses. They had to balance the programmatic changes to meet the demands of the patient care with the additional pressure to meet training requirements. Given the imperatives for social and physical distancing, training programmes have to implement innovative educational methods to substitute traditional teaching. Healthcare organisations must synchronise institutional workforce needs with trainee safety, education and well-being. In this perspective, we have discussed the challenges that can be anticipated and implementing strategies to support fellows during the times of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A model for the pandemic and beyond: Telemedicine for all outpatient gastroenterology referrals reduces unnecessary clinic visits

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has forced providers to dramatically scale down in-person clinic visits to enforce social distancing and triage care to the neediest patients. We describe our five-month experience with a hybrid gastroenterology electronic consultation programme starting in 2019 in which we perform electronic consultations for every referral regardless of indication as well as directly initiate telephone-based telehealth visits with patients without the need for in-person clinic. Over five consecutive months, 1243 hybrid electronic consultations were performed with 356 (29%) resulting in a clinic appointment. The remaining 887 (71%) electronic consultations were resolved without need for a clinic visit. Five hundred and fourteen (41%) electronic consultations resulted in a directly scheduled procedure without clinic appointment. Eighty-five per cent of electronic consultations were performed on the same day of referral and 98% of electronic consultations were completed in under 20 min. A hybrid electronic consultation model which pre-emptively reviews all outpatient referrals streamlines access to specialty care. Such a model may be implemented rapidly during the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic as well as serve as a platform for long-term improvement in efficiency of care.

"Dr. Google, I am in Pain"-Global Internet Searches Associated with Pain: A Retrospective Analysis of Google Trends Data

We aimed to rank the most common locations of pain among Google users globally and locally and analyze secular and seasonal trends in pain-related searches in the years 2004–2019. We used data generated by Google Trends (GT) to identify and analyze global interest in topics (n = 24) related to locations of pain and how these progressed over time. We analyzed secular trends and time series decomposition to identify seasonal variations. We also calculated the interest in all topics with reference to the relative search volume (RSV) of “Abdominal pain”. Google users were most commonly interested in “Headache” (1.30 [times more frequently than “Abdominal pain”]), “Abdominal pain” (1.00), and “Back pain” (0.84). “Headache” was the most frequent search term in n = 41 countries, while “Abdominal pain” was the most frequent term in n = 27 countries. The interest in all pain-related topics except “Dyspareunia” increased over time. The sharpest increase was observed for “Abdominal pain” (5.67 RSV/year), and “Toothache” (5.52 RSV/year). Most of the topics revealed seasonal variations. Among pain-related topics, “Headache,” “Abdominal pain,” and “Back pain” interested most Google users. GT is a novel tool that allows retrospective investigation of complaints among Internet users.