Table 2.
Results of survey regarding workflow and infection prevention and control strategies of endoscopic unit during COVID-19 pandemic
| Results of cross-sectional survey (N = 120) | |
|---|---|
| Distribution of answers based on the regional cumulative incidence of COVID-19 infection | Low risk region: 43 (35.83%) |
| Medium risk region: 28 (23.33%) | |
| High risk region: 49 (40.83%) | |
| Distribution of answers based on the capacity of endoscopy unit | Low capacity lab: 47 (39.17%) |
| Medium capacity lab: 34 (28.33%) | |
| High capacity lab: 38 (31.67%) | |
| Decrease in the number of endoscopic examinations during COVID-19 pandemic | < 25% decrease: 2 (1.67%) |
| 25–50% decrease: 10 (8.35%) | |
| 50–75% decrease: 32 (26.67%) | |
| > 75% decrease: 76 (63.33%) | |
| Endoscopic modality the number of which is decreased during COVID-19 pandemic | Gastroscopy: 114 (95%) |
| Colonoscopy: 110 (91.67%) | |
| ERCP: 81 (67.50%) | |
| EUS: 74 (61.67%) | |
| Rate of endoscopists who were dropped out of work | < 20% of endoscopists: 73 (80.84%) |
| 20–40% of endoscopists: 22 (18.33%) | |
| > 40% of endoscopist: 15 (20.83%) | |
| Rate of nurses who were dropped out of work | < 20% of nurses: 90 (75.00%) |
| 20–40% of nurses: 12 (10.00%) | |
| > 40% of nurses: 18 (15.00%) | |
| Problems in relation with decreased number of healthcare professionals in endoscopy unit | It substantially affected the operation of endoscopy unit: 21 (17.50%) |
| No negative effect was observed: 99 (82.50%) | |
| Knowledge of Position Statement of ESGE and ESGENA | Yes: 117 (97.50%) |
| No: 3 (2.50%) | |
| Risk of endoscopic staff for COVID-19 infection | Increased: 118 (98.33%) |
| Not increased: 2 (1.67%) | |
| Which endoscopic modality has the highest risk for COVID-19 infection? | Risk of modalities is same: 54 (45.00%) |
| Upper endoscopic examinations: 66 (55.00%) | |
| Lower endoscopic examinations: 0 (0.00%) | |
| Training about prevention of COVID-19 infection in endoscopy unit | Yes: 40 (33.33%) |
| No: 80 (66.67%) | |
| Change in personal protective equipment in cases of high-risk patients | Mask: (41 (43.17%) |
| Protective gown: 63 (52.50%) | |
| Nothing, because adequate personal protective equipment is not available: 14 (11.67%) | |
| Nothing, I am not afraid of infection: 2 (1.67%) | |
| Minimization of number of persons in the lab during examination | Yes: 113 (94.17%) |
| Administrator stays in the lab: 5 (1.67%) | |
| Young doctor stays in the lab, who is learning endoscopy: 2 (1.67%) | |
| Giving surgical mask to patient during examination | Never: 11 (9.17%) |
| Sometimes: 18 (15.00%) | |
| Patients can use their own mask: 17 (14.17%) | |
| Only during colonoscopy: 11 (9.17%) | |
| Always: 63 (52.50%) | |
| Negative pressure room | Yes: 1 (0.83%) |
| No: 199 (99.17%) | |
| Adequate ventilation | No: 6 (5.00%) |
| Natural ventilation through opening windows: 90 (75.00%) | |
| Mixed mode of mechanical ventilation: 18 (15.00%) | |
| Air purification 6 (5.00%) | |
| Cleaning and sterilization of air | Ultraviolet (UV) irradiation: 21 (17.50%) |
| Ozone treatment: 2 (1.67%) | |
COVID-19 coronavirus disease 19, EUS endoscopic ultrasound, ERCP endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, ESGE European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, ESGENA European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associats