Department of Gastroenterology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100005, China.
Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100005, China.
BMC Gastroenterol. 2024 Oct 14;24(1):364. doi: 10.1186/s12876-024-03436-z.
The aim was to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAPs) of endoscopy among gastroenterologists in the diagnosis and management of IBD in China.
A multicenter cross-sectional KAP study was performed. The questionnaire was developed and improved using feedback and opinions from a team of experienced IBD specialist professors and then distributed and collected online. In addition, eight fellow gastroenterologists participated in an IBD endoscopy training program were asked to review endoscopic images, and the consistency of the endoscopic scores before and after training was calculated.
A total of 193 participants from 12 provincial-level administrative regions encompassing both the Northern and Southern parts of China completed the study questionnaire. The median age of the participants was 40 (36, 45) years, with the majority being female (70.5%). The median professional experience as gastroenterologists was 11 (7, 17) years, while the median experience as endoscopists was 8 (3, 15) years. The median knowledge score was 8 out of 10 points for single-choice questions; however, most gastroenterologists believed that some concepts in these endoscopic indices were vague, including those regarding deep ulcerations, ulcerated surfaces, affected surfaces and narrowing in open-answer questions. The UCEIS and SES-CD were considered most consistent with clinical activity score in the evaluation of UC and CD, respectively. IBD subspecialists and gastroenterologists who had previously received IBD endoscopy screening training were more likely to use endoscopic indices (p<0.001, p = 0.029, respectively). The Rutgeerts score demonstrated the most significant improvement in consistency before and after training, from 0.407 (95% CI: 0.025-0.999) to 0.909 (95% CI: 0.530-1.000).
We propose the elucidation of ambiguous definitions in endoscopic indices, enhancement of training, and the application of innovative technology to enhance the application of endoscopic evaluation and endoscopic indices in clinical practice.
本研究旨在评估中国消化科医生在炎症性肠病(IBD)诊断和管理中对内窥镜的知识、态度和实践(KAP)。
采用多中心横断面 KAP 研究。使用经验丰富的 IBD 专家教授团队的反馈和意见对问卷进行了开发和改进,然后在线分发和收集。此外,还邀请了 8 名参加 IBD 内镜培训计划的消化科医生对内镜图像进行回顾,并计算培训前后内镜评分的一致性。
共有来自中国北方和南方 12 个省级行政区域的 193 名参与者完成了研究问卷。参与者的中位年龄为 40(36,45)岁,大多数为女性(70.5%)。作为消化科医生的中位专业经验为 11(7,17)年,作为内镜医生的中位经验为 8(3,15)年。单项选择题的知识评分中位数为 10 分中的 8 分;然而,大多数消化科医生认为这些内镜指标中的一些概念比较模糊,包括开放性问题中关于深度溃疡、溃疡表面、受累表面和狭窄的概念。UCEIS 和 SES-CD 分别被认为在评估 UC 和 CD 的临床活动评分中最一致。IBD 专科医生和之前接受过 IBD 内镜筛查培训的消化科医生更有可能使用内镜指标(p<0.001,p=0.029)。在培训前后,Rutgeerts 评分的一致性有了最显著的提高,从 0.407(95%CI:0.025-0.999)提高到 0.909(95%CI:0.530-1.000)。
我们建议阐明内镜指标中模糊的定义,加强培训,并应用创新技术,以提高内镜评估和内镜指标在临床实践中的应用。