Background Video consultation (VC) is gaining attention as a possible alternative to outpatient clinic visits. However, little is known in terms of attitude, satisfaction and quality of care using VC over a face-to-face (F2F) consultation. The aim of this observational survey study was to compare the attitude and satisfaction with VC amongst patients suffering from colorectal cancer and their treating surgeons at the outpatient surgical care clinic in a tertiary referral centre. Methods A patient-preference model was chosen following the concept of shared decision making. A total of fifty patients with colorectal cancer were asked to choose between VC-or a F2F-contact during their follow up at the outpatient surgical care clinic and were subsequently assigned to either the VC-group or the F2F-group. Attitude and satisfaction rates of both groups and their surgeons were measured using a questionnaire administered immediately after the consultation. Results Out of the 50 patients, 42% chose VC as their preferred follow-up modality. Patients demographics did not differ significantly. Patients who use video calling in their personal life choose VC significantly more often than patients lacking such experience (p = 0.010). These patients scored high on both the attitude-and satisfaction scale of the post-VC questionnaire. Patients who chose a F2F-contact seemed to question the ability of the surgeon to properly assess their healthcare condition by using a video connection more (p = 0.024). Surgeons were highly satisfied with the use of VC. Conclusions Based on patient preference, VC is equivalent to a F2F consultation in terms of patient satisfaction and perceived quality of care. Shared decision making is preferred with regard to which contact modality is used during follow up. For easy uptake in other environments it is to be recommended to facilitate VC using the electronic patient portal.

ObjectivesTelephone consultations are frequently used in the outpatient setting in order to avoid unnecessary travel and to reduce hospital visit-related costs for patients. However, they are limited by the absence of non-verbal communication in contrast to video consultation. Little is known considering the possible advantages of using video consultation in comparison to telephone consultation according to both patients and healthcare providers.MethodsPatients with colorectal diseases were asked to choose between a telephone consultation or a video consultation for their next appointment at the outpatient clinic of a tertiary referral centre. Willingness to use video consultation, value of non-verbal communication, patient satisfaction, provider satisfaction and user friendliness of the video connection technology were measured using questionnaires.ResultsNone of the included patients ever had a video consultation before with a healthcare provider. Nonetheless, 22/50 preferred a video consultation over a telephone consultation. Patients who preferred a video consultation underlined the benefits of providing visual feedback to both patients and healthcare providers. Moreover, healthcare providers felt they were better able to assess the patients’ healthcare condition.ConclusionFor patients who value both verbal and non-verbal interaction and feel comfortable with the use of video consultation, video consultation is the preferred contact modality. Shared decision making should be used to choose the preferred interaction modality. For patients with low digital skills, support might be needed or video consultation may not be the preferred choice.

Background: An unmet need remains for improved management in perianal fistulising Crohn's disease (pCD). Recently, local administration of adipose-derived cells has shown promising results. Aims: To assess the safety and feasibility of injection of stromal vascular fraction (SVF) with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in patients with pCD. Methods: Patients ≥ 18 years with pCD were included and underwent fistula curettage, SVF with PRP injection, and closure of the internal opening. The primary endpoint was safety at 12 months. The secondary outcomes were complete radiological healing at 3 months (absence of fluid-containing tracts on MRI) and partial and complete clinical response at 3 and 12 months (closure of ≥1, respectively, all treated external opening(s)). Results: Twenty-five patients were included (35 [IQR 25-40] years; 14 [56%] female); median CD duration 4 [IQR 2-8] years. Twenty-four (95%) patients had previously undergone fistula surgery. No adverse events were encountered at lipoharvesting sites. Two (8%) patients were readmitted to hospital and six (24%) underwent unplanned re-interventions. Post-operative MRI (n = 24) showed complete radiological healing in nine (37.5%) patients. Partial clinical response was present in 48% (12/25) at 3 months and in 68% (17/25) at 12 months, and complete clinical closure in five (20%) patients at 3 months and in 10 (40%) patients at 12 months. Conclusion: Injection with autologous SVF with PRP is feasible and safe in patients with treatment-refractory pCD. Early complete radiological healing was observed in more than one-third of patients, and clinical response in two-thirds of patients at 12 months. How to cite this article: Arkenbosch JHC, van Ruler O, Dwarkasing RS, Fuhler GM, Schouten WR, van Oud-Alblas MB, et al. Stromal vascular fraction with platelet-rich plasma injection during surgery is feasible and safe in treatmentrefractory perianal fistulising Crohn's disease: A pilot study.

No abstract