No abstract

AIMTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis for the diagnostic accuracy of in vivo lesion characterization in colonic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), using optical imaging techniques, including virtual chromoendoscopy (VCE), dye-based chromoendoscopy (DBC), magnification endoscopy and confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE).METHODSWe searched Medline, Embase and the Cochrane library. We performed a bivariate meta-analysis to calculate the pooled estimate sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative likelihood ratios (+LHR, -LHR), diagnostic odds ratios (DOR), and area under the SROC curve (AUSROC) for each technology group. A subgroup analysis was performed to investigate differences in real-time non-magnified Kudo pit patterns (with VCE and DBC) and real-time CLE.RESULTSWe included 22 studies [1491 patients; 4674 polyps, of which 539 (11.5%) were neoplastic]. Real-time CLE had a pooled sensitivity of 91% (95%CI: 66%-98%), specificity of 97% (95%CI: 94%-98%), and an AUSROC of 0.98 (95%CI: 0.97-0.99). Magnification endoscopy had a pooled sensitivity of 90% (95%CI: 77%-96%) and specificity of 87% (95%CI: 81%-91%). VCE had a pooled sensitivity of 86% (95%CI: 62%-95%) and specificity of 87% (95%CI: 72%-95%). DBC had a pooled sensitivity of 67% (95%CI: 44%-84%) and specificity of 86% (95%CI: 72%-94%).CONCLUSIONReal-time CLE is a highly accurate technology for differentiating neoplastic from non-neoplastic lesions in patients with colonic IBD. However, most CLE studies were performed by single expert users within tertiary centres, potentially confounding these results.

The Affordable Care Act's core achievement is to make all Americans insurable, by requiring insurers to accept all applicants at rates based on population averages regardless of health status. The act also increases coverage by allowing states to expand Medicaid (the social healthcare program for families and people with low income and resources) to cover everyone near the poverty line, and by subsidizing private insurance for people who are not poor but who do not have workplace coverage. The act allows most people to keep the same kind of insurance that they currently have, and it does not change how private insurance pays physicians and hospitals. Although the act falls short of achieving truly universal coverage, nine million uninsured people have received coverage so far. Market reforms have not hurt the insurance industry's profitability, prices for individual insurance have been lower than expected, and government costs so far have been less than initially projected. The act expands several ongoing pilot programs in Medicare that reform how doctors and hospitals are paid, but it does not directly change how private insurers pay healthcare providers. Nevertheless, it has set into motion market dynamics that are affecting medical practice, such as limiting insurance networks to fewer providers and requiring patients to pay for more treatment costs out of pocket. In response, many hospitals and physicians are forming closer and larger affiliations. Further time and study are needed to learn whether these evolutionary changes will achieve their goals without harming the doctor-patient relationship.

Introduction The aim of this study was to examine whether telehealth is as safe and effective as traditional office visits in assessing and treating patients with symptoms consistent with COVID-19. Methods In this retrospective cross-sectional study, the primary outcome was any 14-day related healthcare follow-up event(s). Secondary outcomes were the type of 14-day related follow-up event including hospital admission, emergency department visit, office visit, telehealth visit and/or multiple follow-up visits. Individual visit types were identified due to the significant difference between a hospital admission and an office visit. Logistic regressions were done using the predictors of visit type, age, gender and comorbidities and the primary outcome variable of a related follow-up visit and then by follow-up type: hospital admission, emergency department visit or office visit. Results Of 1305 visits, median age was 42.3 years and 65.8% were female. Traditional office visits accounted for 741 (56.8%) of initial visits, while 564 (43.2%) visits occurred via telehealth. One hundred and forty-six (25.9%) of the telehealth visits resulted in a 14-day related healthcare follow-up visit versus 161 (21.7%) of the office visits (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.22, 95% CI 0.94–1.58). Discussion There was no significant difference in related follow-ups of initial telehealth visits compared to initial office visits including no significant difference in hospital admission or emergency department visits. These findings suggest that based on follow up healthcare utilization, telehealth may be a safe and effective option in assessing and treating patients with respiratory symptoms as the COVID-19 pandemic continues.