Objective The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated changes in the delivery of ambulatory care for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including transitioning many visits to virtual formats and delaying non-urgent assessments. We aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on IBD patient care from health care providers’ (HCP) and patients’ perspectives. Methods We administered a 42-question HCP survey and a 44-question patient survey, which evaluated HCP and patient experience and satisfaction with care delivery and delays in access to IBD care during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results Surveys were completed by 19.2% (24/125) HCPs and 25.8% (408/1581) patients. Overall, 82.7% of patients with IBD maintained their care without disruption. The majority of patients were satisfied with a transition to virtual care. All HCPs were willing to use virtual care in the future; however, 60% (14/24) of HCPs reported that virtual care was not equivalent to in-person visits. Patients reported concerns around access to health resources, the uncertainty of IBD-specific care, and fear and stress due to employment uncertainty and safety. Providers also reported concerns about patient safety, patient education, adequate remuneration and challenges with providing care for new patients on virtual platforms. Conclusion While some delays in health care delivery occurred during the first wave of the pandemic, both patients and HCPs were satisfied with a transition to new models of care delivery. These models may remain in place post-pandemic and allow for flexibility in care delivery that is acceptable to both patients and HCPs.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic is affecting patients and healthcare providers worldwide. During the first wave of the pandemic, healthcare delivery shifted from in-person to virtual clinics. Non-urgent and some emergent procedures, including endoscopies, surgeries, and imaging, were delayed to limit the spread and divert resources to COVID-19. Aims To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in care to IBD patients Methods A survey study was conducted to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on IBD care. All patients had a virtual clinic appointment between March to July 2020 at either: University of Alberta Hospital or the University of Calgary Clinic. A section of the survey assessed patient experience of virtual clinics and delays in access to IBD care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results A total of 1581 patients were contacted to complete the survey. 628 patients agreed to participate in the survey, however not all patients completed each component. The mean age of patients who participated in the survey was 48 years (SD = 15.19). 408 patients responded to satisfaction/future use questions: 84.3% (344) patients agree/strongly agree they were comfortable communicating to the physician using the remote system, 77.5% (316) of patients agree/strongly agree that virtual clinic is an acceptable way to receive healthcare services, 84.8% (346) of patients agree/strongly agree they would use virtual care services again, and 82.6% (337) agree/strongly agree they were satisfied with the telehealth system. Additional challenges were reported by 228 patients. Fear and stress (infection risk/mental health concerns/unemployment) was reported by 57.4% (131) patients. Access to healthcare services, PPE, and community resources was a challenge experienced by 26.3% (60) patients. Additionally, 16.2% (37) patients experienced uncertainty around IBD-specific care, including procedures, treatments, labs, and medications. Overall, 17.3% of patients reported some type of delay in care by July 2020. Table 1 shows the proportion of patients with a delay by type of care and the median delay: 5.7% of patients with IBD had surgery delayed by a median of 10 weeks (8–16 weeks). Conclusions While some delays in healthcare delivery occurred during the first wave of the pandemic, overall 82.7% of patients with IBD maintained their care without disruption. Sustaining healthcare delivery to the IBD community required adaptation to virtual care; however, patient satisfaction was overwhelming positive among patients with IBD. Funding Agencies None

Background In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, gastroenterologists in Alberta moved to virtual care for many clinic visits. As the public health situation evolves, it is important to evaluate provider satisfaction with virtual care during these unprecedented times. Aims To assess healthcare provider (HCP) satisfaction with virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We administered a 20-item satisfaction survey that assessed the usefulness, ease of use, interface qualities, reliability, and overall satisfaction with virtual care tools for the delivery of care to patients with gastrointestinal diseases. One hundred and twenty-five gastroenterologists in Alberta were invited to participate via email. We used a modified Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) which was open for response from June 19-August 30, 2020. Results The overall response rate was 19% (24/125) with 46% female respondents. Most respondents worked in an academic facility (63%) and had been in practice for a mean duration of 12.3 years. Respondents were from seven facilities within the South, Calgary, Central and Edmonton health zones. Virtual care reported was a hybrid model consisting of telephone and in-person (54%) or telephone and video consults (42%). Although 90% indicated that virtual care tools improved access to healthcare, provided location flexibility and were appropriate to meet healthcare needs, only 42% agreed that it saved time. Inconclusive virtual consultations due to the absence of physical examination and missing lab values was reported by 75% and 33% of HCPs, respectively. Ninety-five percent of HCPs who used video conferencing found it simple, easy to learn and were able to become productive quickly with it. Over 60% of HCPs reported that virtual care (irrespective of the platform used) was not the same as in-person visits. The mean overall satisfaction for HCPs who rarely or never had virtual care prior to the pandemic, was 0.57 points higher than those who often provided virtual care (4.36 vs 3.79; 95% CI: 0.26–0.88, p=0.001). Overall, 88% of providers were satisfied with virtual care and all respondents were willing to use it again (Figure 1). Identified areas of concern included patient safety, patient education on best practices, adequate remuneration, additional administrative duties, and challenges with providing care for new patients on virtual platforms. Conclusions This survey of GI providers in Alberta showed high satisfaction and acceptance with virtual care. However, the majority reported it to be less reliable than in-person visits. Access to Alberta Netcare to view investigations was deemed valuable. Areas of concern that needs to be addressed include patient education on virtual care best practices and provider resources to assist with new consultations on virtual platforms. Funding Agencies None

No abstract