Aerodigestive Center, Center for Motility and Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA.
Division of Gastroenterology, Colorado Children's Hospital, Aurora, CO.
J Pediatr. 2021 May;232:166-175.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.12.067. Epub 2020 Dec 30.
To evaluate differences in practice patterns between aerodigestive and nonaerodigestive providers in pediatric gastroenterology when diagnosing and treating common aerodigestive complaints.
A questionnaire comprised of clinical vignettes with multiple-choice questions was distributed to both aerodigestive and nonaerodigestive pediatric gastroenterologists. Vignettes focused on management of commonly encountered general gastroenterology and aerodigestive issues, such as gastroesophageal (GE) reflux, aspiration, and feeding difficulties. Tests of equal proportions were used to compare rates of testing and empiric therapy within and across groups. Multivariate analysis was used to assess differences in response rates between aerodigestive and nonaerodigestive providers.
A total of 88 pediatric gastroenterologists from 18 institutions completed the questionnaire. There were 35 aerodigestive gastroenterology providers and 53 nonaerodigestive gastroenterology providers. The nonaerodigestive group included 31 general gastroenterologists and 22 providers with self-identified subspecialty gastroenterology expertise. Aerodigestive specialists were more likely than nonaerodigestive gastroenterologists to pursue testing over empiric therapy in cases involving isolated respiratory symptoms (P < .05); aerodigestive providers were more likely to recommend pH-impedance testing, videofluoroscopic swallow studies, and upper gastrointestinal barium study (P < .05 for each test) depending on the referring physician. For vignettes involving infant GE reflux, both groups chose empiric treatments more frequently than testing (P < .001), although aerodigestive providers were more likely than nonaerodigestive providers to pursue testing like upper gastrointestinal barium studies (P < .05).
Although some practice patterns were similar between groups, aerodigestive providers pursued more testing than nonaerodigestive providers in several clinical scenarios including infants with respiratory symptoms and GE reflux.
评估在诊断和治疗常见的气消化道疾病时,儿科胃肠病学中的气消化和非气消化提供者之间的实践模式差异。
向气消化和非气消化儿科胃肠病学家分发了一份包含临床病例的问卷,其中包含多项选择题。病例重点关注常见的一般胃肠病和气消化道问题的管理,例如胃食管(GE)反流、吸入和喂养困难。使用等比例测试来比较组内和组间的测试和经验性治疗率。使用多变量分析来评估气消化和非气消化提供者之间的反应率差异。
共有来自 18 个机构的 88 名儿科胃肠病学家完成了问卷。有 35 名气消化胃肠病专家和 53 名非气消化胃肠病专家。非气消化组包括 31 名普通胃肠病专家和 22 名自认为有专业胃肠病学专长的专家。与非气消化胃肠病学家相比,气消化专家更倾向于在涉及孤立性呼吸症状的情况下进行测试而不是经验性治疗(P <.05);气消化专家更倾向于推荐 pH 阻抗测试、视频荧光透视吞咽研究和上消化道钡餐检查(每种测试 P <.05),这取决于转诊医生。对于涉及婴儿 GE 反流的病例,两组都更倾向于选择经验性治疗而不是测试(P <.001),尽管气消化专家比非气消化专家更倾向于进行上消化道钡餐检查等测试(P <.05)。
尽管两组的一些实践模式相似,但在包括有呼吸症状和 GE 反流的婴儿在内的几种临床情况下,气消化提供者比非气消化提供者更倾向于进行更多的测试。