Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of endoscopy among gastroenterologists in diagnosis and management of inflammatory bowel disease in China: a multicenter cross-sectional study

Background: The aim was to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAPs) of endoscopy among gastroenterologists in the diagnosis and management of IBD in China. Methods: 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. Results: 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). Conclusions: 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.