Training and competence assessment in GI endoscopy: a systematic review

Impact of a simulation-based ergonomics training curriculum on work-related musculoskeletal injury risk in colonoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopists are at risk of developing musculoskeletal injuries (MSIs), and few receive training on ergonomics. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of a simulation-based ergonomics training curriculum (ETC) on work-related MSI risk during clinical colonoscopy.

METHODS

Novice endoscopists underwent a simulation-based ETC and were compared with an historical control group who received simulation-based training without ergonomics training. The ETC included a didactic lecture and video on ergonomics in colonoscopy, feedback from supervisors on ergonomics, and an ergonomics checklist to augment feedback and promote self-reflection. Participants were assessed using the rapid entire body assessment (REBA) and rapid upper limb assessment (RULA). The primary outcome was participants' REBA scores during 2 clinical colonoscopies 4 to 6 weeks after training.

RESULTS

In clinical colonoscopy, the ETC group had superior REBA scores (clinical procedure 1: median score, 6 vs 11; P < .001; clinical procedure 2: median score, 6 vs 10; P < .001). In a simulated colonoscopy, the ETC group did not have significantly different REBA or RULA scores between baseline, immediately after training, and 4 to 6 weeks after (REBA: median scores of 5, 5, and 5, respectively; P > .05; RULA: median scores of 6, 6, and 6, respectively; P > .05). The control group had worsening REBA and RULA scores during the study timeline (REBA: median scores of 5 at baseline, 9 immediately after training, and 9 at 4-6 weeks after training; P < .001; RULA: median scores of 6, 7, and 7, respectively; P = .04) during simulated procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

A simulation-based ETC is associated with reduced risk of MSI during endoscopy. Although the REBA score was improved, the intervention group was still within the medium-risk range.

Educational interventions are associated with improvements in colonoscopy quality indicators: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  The quality of screening-related colonoscopy depends on several physician- and patient-related factors. Adenoma detection rate (ADR) varies considerably between endoscopists. Educational interventions aim to improve endoscopists' ADRs, but their overall impact is uncertain. We aimed to assess whether there is an association between educational interventions and colonoscopy quality indicators. Methods  A comprehensive search was performed through August 2019 for studies reporting any associations between educational interventions and any colonoscopy quality indicators. Our primary outcome of interest was ADR. Two authors assessed eligibility criteria and extracted data independently. Risk of bias was also assessed for included studies. Pooled rate ratios (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were reported using DerSimonian and Laird random effects models. Results  From 2,253 initial studies, eight were included in the meta-analysis for ADR, representing 86,008 colonoscopies. Educational interventions were associated with improvements in overall ADR (RR 1.29, 95 % CI 1.25 to 1.42, 95 % prediction interval 1.09 to 1.53) and proximal ADR (RR 1.39, 95 % CI 1.29 to 1.48), with borderline increases in withdrawal time, ([WT], mean difference 0.29 minutes, 95 % CI - 0.12 to 0.70 minutes). Educational interventions did not affect cecal intubation rate ([CIR], RR 1.01, 95 % CI 1.00 to 1.01). Heterogeneity was considerable across many of the analyses. Conclusions  Educational interventions are associated with significant improvements in ADR, in particular, proximal ADR, and are not associated with improvements in WT or CIR. Educational interventions should be considered an important option in quality improvement programs aiming to optimize the performance of screening-related colonoscopy.

Development and validation of metric-based-training to proficiency simulation curriculum for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy using a novel assessment checklist

BACKGROUND/AIMS

: This study aimed to design a structured simulation training curriculum for upper endoscopy and validate a new assessment checklist.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A proficiency-based progression stepwise curriculum was developed consisting of didactic, technical and non-technical components using a virtual reality simulator (VRS). It focused on: scope navigation, anatomical landmarks identification, mucosal inspection, retro-flexion, pathology identification, and targeting biopsy. A total of 5 experienced and 10 novice endoscopists were recruited. All participants performed each of the selected modules twice, and mean and median performance were compared between the two groups. Novices pre-set level of proficiency was set as 2 standard deviations below the mean of experts. Performance was assessed using multiple-choice questions for knowledge, while validated simulator parameters incorporated into a novel checklist; Simulation Endoscopic Skill Assessment Score (SESAS) were used for technical skills.

RESULTS

: The following VRS outcome measures have shown expert vs novice baseline discriminative ability: total procedure time, number of attempts for esophageal intubation and time in red-out. All novice trainees achieved the preset level of proficiency by the end of training. There were no statistically significant differences between experts' and trainees' rate of complications, landmarks identification and patient discomfort. SESAS checklist showed high degree of agreement with the VRS metrices (kappa = 0.83) and the previously validated direct observation of procedural skills tool (kappa = 0.90).

CONCLUSION

: The Fundamentals of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy simulation training curriculum and its SESAS global assessment tool have been primarily validated and can serve as a valuable addition to the gastroenterology fellowship programs. Follow up study of trainee performance in workplaces is recommended for consequences validation.

Current challenges and future needs of clinical and endoscopic training in gastroenterology: a European survey

Background and study aims  A universal European training program in gastroenterology and hepatology is currently not available. The European Board of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (EBGH) has produced guidance regarding expected competencies for European gastroenterology trainees but it is unclear whether these have been incorporated in national curricula. The aim of this study was to provide an in-depth assessment of training and research opportunities, professional activities and of socioeconomic aspects of gastroenterology training across Europe through a web-based 90-point questionnaire. Materials and methods  Physicians in their last year or who had recently finished their training, from 16 European countries, were invited to answer the questionnaire. Results  A total of 144 physicians answered the survey. A minimum number of procedures is required before completing training in nine of 16 countries (56 %). Overall, European trainees dedicate a median of 12 months (IQR 6-25) of their training period to endoscopy and a median of 3 months (IQR 0-6) to ultrasound. Training in interventional endoscopy was not always exhaustive, as about 50 % of participants performed fewer of several interventional procedures than was recommended by EBGH, most participants did not perform endoscopic hemostasis or endoscopic mucosal resection, and nearly a half of participants had no access to pancreatobiliary endoscopy training. Finally, up to 13 % of residents complete their training without the supervision of a mentor. Conclusion  In this large European survey, deep gaps and considerable differences in several gastroenterology training activities were found both among and within 16 European countries. Homogenization of educational programs and training opportunities across Europe is therefore necessary.

Development and Assessment of a Gastroscopy Electronic Learning System for Primary Learners: Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Endoscopic examination is a popular and routine procedure for the diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal (GI) diseases. Skilled endoscopists are in great demand in clinical practice, but the training process for beginners to become endoscopy specialists is fairly long. Convenience and a self-paced, learner-centered approach make electronic learning (e-learning) an excellent instructional prospect.

Objective

This study aimed to develop and apply an e-learning system in gastroscopy teaching and learning and to evaluate its effectiveness and user satisfaction.

Methods

The e-learning software Gastroscope Roaming System was developed for primary learners. The system simulates the real structure of the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract to teach the main characteristics of gastroscopy under both normal conditions and conditions of common UGI tract diseases. A randomized controlled trial was conducted. Participants were randomly allocated to an e-learning group (EG)or a non–e-learning control group after a pretest. On completing the training, participants undertook a posttest and gastroscopy examination. In addition, the EG completed a satisfaction questionnaire.

Results

Of the 44 volunteers, 41 (93%) completed the gastroscopy learning and testing components. No significant pretest differences were found between the intervention and control groups (mean 50.86, SD 6.12 vs mean 50.76, SD 6.88; P=.96). After 1 month of learning, the EG’s posttest scores were higher (mean 83.70, SD 5.99 vs mean 78.76, SD 7.58; P=.03) and improved more (P=.01) than those of the control group, with better performance in the gastroscopy examination (mean 91.05, SD 4.58 vs mean 84.38, SD 5.19; P<.001). Overall, 85% (17/20) of the participants were satisfied with the e-learning system, and 95% (19/20) of the participants considered it successful.

Conclusions

E-learning is an effective educational strategy for primary learners to acquire skills in gastroscopy examination and endoscopic imaging of the GI tract.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-IOR-17013091; http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=22142

Evaluation of a Human Virtual-Reality Endoscopy Trainer for Teaching Early Endoscopy Skills to Veterinarians

Competency in flexible endoscopy is a major goal of small animal internal medicine residency training programs. Hands-on laboratories to teach entry-level skills have traditionally used anesthetized laboratory dogs (live dog laboratory [LDL]). Virtual-reality endoscopy trainers (VRET) are used for this purpose in human medicine with the clear benefits of avoiding live animal use, decreasing trainee stress, and allowing repeated, independent training sessions. However, there are currently no commercially available veterinary endoscopy simulators. The purpose of the study was to determine whether a human VRET can be a reasonable alternative to a LDL for teaching early veterinary endoscopy skills. Twelve veterinarians with limited or no endoscopy experience underwent training with a VRET (n = 6) or a LDL (n = 6), performed two recorded esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD) on anesthetized dogs for evaluation purposes (outcomes laboratory), and then underwent training with the alternative method. Participants completed questionnaires before any training and following each training session. No significant differences were found between training methods based on: measured parameters from the outcomes laboratory, including duration of time to perform EGD; evaluators' assessment of skills; and, assessment of skills through blinded review of the esophageal portion of EGD recordings. The VRET was less stressful for participants than the LDL (p = .02). All participants found that the VRET was a useful and acceptable alternative to the LDL for training of early endoscopy skills. Based on this limited study, VRET can serve as a reasonable alternative to LDL for teaching endoscopy skills to veterinarians.

Characterizing the Development of Colonoscopy Competence Using Assessment Data

Assessment of endoscopist competence is an increasingly important component of colonoscopy quality assurance. In this study from the Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, validity evidence is provided for the use of the Direct Observation of Procedural Skills assessment tool in the formative setting during training. In this national UK dataset, overall colonoscopy competence was typically achieved after 200-249 procedures, although certain complex procedural skills ("proactive problem solving" and "loop management") had not reached the threshold for competence even after 300 procedures. These data will help inform the development and/or refinement of certification policies and practices in jurisdictions around the world.

Colonoscopy Direct Observation of Procedural Skills Assessment Tool for Evaluating Competency Development During Training

INTRODUCTION

Formative colonoscopy direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) assessments were updated in 2016 and incorporated into UK training but lack validity evidence. We aimed to appraise the validity of DOPS assessments, benchmark performance, and evaluate competency development during training in diagnostic colonoscopy.

METHODS

This prospective national study identified colonoscopy DOPS submitted over an 18-month period to the UK training e-portfolio. Generalizability analyses were conducted to evaluate internal structure validity and reliability. Benchmarking was performed using receiver operator characteristic analyses. Learning curves for DOPS items and domains were studied, and multivariable analyses were performed to identify predictors of DOPS competency.

RESULTS

Across 279 training units, 10,749 DOPS submitted for 1,199 trainees were analyzed. The acceptable reliability threshold (G > 0.70) was achieved with 3 assessors performing 2 DOPS each. DOPS competency rates correlated with the unassisted caecal intubation rate (rho 0.404, P < 0.001). Demonstrating competency in 90% of assessed items provided optimal sensitivity (90.2%) and specificity (87.2%) for benchmarking overall DOPS competence. This threshold was attained in the following order: "preprocedure" (50-99 procedures), "endoscopic nontechnical skills" and "postprocedure" (150-199), "management" (200-249), and "procedure" (250-299) domain. At item level, competency in "proactive problem solving" (rho 0.787) and "loop management" (rho 0.780) correlated strongest with the overall DOPS rating (P < 0.001) and was the last to develop. Lifetime procedure count, DOPS count, trainer specialty, easier case difficulty, and higher cecal intubation rate were significant multivariable predictors of DOPS competence.

DISCUSSION

This study establishes milestones for competency acquisition during colonoscopy training and provides novel validity and reliability evidence to support colonoscopy DOPS as a competency assessment tool.

Training in bariatric and metabolic endoscopy

The limited penetration of bariatric surgery and the scarce outcome of pharmacological therapies created a favorable space for primary bariatric endoscopic techniques. Furthermore, bariatric endoscopy is largely used to diagnose and treat surgical complications and weight regain after bariatric surgery. The increasingly essential role of endoscopy in the management of obese patients results in the need for trained professionals. Training methods are evolving, and the apprenticeship method is giving way to the simulation-based method. Existing simulation platforms include mechanical simulators, ex vivo and in vivo models, and virtual reality simulators. This review analyzes current training methods for bariatric endoscopy and available training programs with dedicated bariatric core curricula, giving a glimpse of future perspectives.

Exploring Use of Endoscopy Simulation in North American Pediatric Gastroenterology Fellowship Training Programs

OBJECTIVES

Increasing evidence supports simulation-based training; however, limited data exist regarding its use in pediatric gastroenterology (GI). We explored the use of simulation-based endoscopy training in pediatric GI fellowship programs across North America.

METHODS

GI fellowship program directors (PDs) from the United States and Canada were surveyed between August to November 2018. The pretested, electronic survey comprised 3 sections: program demographics; details of current simulation-based training; and PDs' perceptions of endoscopy simulation. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Forty-three of 71 (61%) PDs responded (6 Canadian, 37 US). Programs were predominantly academic (95%) and enrolled 1.87 ± 1.01 fellows/yr. Twenty-four programs (56%) reported using simulation for endoscopy training, whereas 8 (19%) used simulation for nonprocedural education. Only 2 programs (5%) used endoscopy simulation for assessment. Of those using simulation (n = 24), upper endoscopy and colonoscopy were trained most frequently, and mechanical simulators were used most commonly. Eight programs (33%) required simulation training prior to clinical performance. Although 10 programs (42%) provided protected training time, only 2 (8%) tracked hours. Three programs (13%) reported having an organized curriculum and 6 (25%) train their endoscopic trainers. Cost, time constraints, and lack of a standardized curriculum were perceived as key barriers to integration. Most PDs reported a need for endoscopy simulation to train both technical and nontechnical skills; however, they felt simulation cannot replace clinical experience.

CONCLUSION

PDs recognize the potential importance of endoscopy simulation, particularly for novices; however, only 56% report using it. Perceived barriers indicate the need for inexpensive portable simulators and a validated pediatric simulation curriculum to promote uptake.

The performance indicator of colonic intubation (PICI) in a FIT-based colorectal cancer screening program

Objective: Cecal intubation rate (CIR) is known to be inversely associated with interval colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. Cecal intubation may be achieved by the use of force and sedation jeopardizing patient safety. The Performance Indicator of Colonic Intubation (PICI) is defined as the proportion of colonoscopies achieving cecal intubation with use of ≤2 mg midazolam and no-mild patient-experienced discomfort. We aimed (i) to measure the variation of PICI between colonoscopists and colonoscopy units; (ii) to assess the correlation between the individual components of PICI; and (iii) to evaluate the association between PICI and commonly used performance indicators. Materials and methods: For the period 1 July 2015 through 30 June 2017 of the prevalent round of the Danish FIT-based CRC screening program, we included colonoscopies performed at four units in the Central Denmark Region within 60 days after a positive FIT-test. The PICI variation was evaluated using rates and ranges. Correlations between individual PICI components were assessed using Pearson correlation coefficients. Polyp detection rate (PDR), Adenoma detection rate (ADR), Polyp retrieval rate (PRR) and Withdrawal time (WT) were assessed within PICI quartiles. Results: The overall PICI was 78.7% with substantial variation between colonoscopists (40.0-91.9%) and units (72.6-82.0%). CIR was significantly correlated with patient-experienced comfort (r = 0.49, n = 73, p < .0001) and we observed that colonoscopists with a PICI between 79.9% and 84.3%) had the highest ADR. Conclusion: We found a substantial variation in PICI between colonoscopists and between colonoscopy units, which may reflect potential for quality improvements.

Endoscopic simulators

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Simulation refers to educational tools that allow for repetitive instruction in a nonpatient care environment that is risk-free. In GI endoscopy, simulators include ex vivo animal tissue models, live animal models, mechanical models, and virtual reality (VR) computer simulators.

METHODS

After a structured search of the peer-reviewed medical literature, this document reviews commercially available GI endoscopy simulation systems and clinical outcomes of simulation in endoscopy.

RESULTS

Mechanical simulators and VR simulators are frequently used early in training, whereas ex vivo and in vivo animal models are more commonly used for advanced endoscopy training. Multiple studies and systematic reviews show that simulation-based training appears to provide novice endoscopists with some advantage over untrained peers with regard to endpoints such as independent procedure completion and performance time, among others. Data also suggest that simulation training may accelerate the acquisition of specific technical skills in colonoscopy and upper endoscopy early in training. However, the available literature suggests that the benefits of simulator training appear to attenuate and cease after a finite period. Further studies are needed to determine if meeting competency metrics using simulation will predict actual clinical competency.

CONCLUSIONS

Simulation training is a promising modality that may aid in endoscopic education. However, for widespread incorporation of simulators into gastroenterology training programs to occur, simulators must show a sustained advantage over traditional mentored teaching in a cost-effective manner. Because most studies evaluating simulation have focused on novice learners, the role of simulation training in helping practicing endoscopists gain proficiency using new techniques and devices should be further explored.

ASGE EndoVators Summit: simulators and the future of endoscopic training

Interest in the use of simulation for acquiring, maintaining, and assessing skills in GI endoscopy has grown over the past decade, as evidenced by recent American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines encouraging the use of endoscopy simulation training and its incorporation into training standards by a key accreditation organization. An EndoVators Summit, partially supported by a grant from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) of the National Institutes of Health, (NIH) was held at the ASGE Institute for Training and Technology from November 19 to 20, 2017. The summit brought together over 70 thought leaders in simulation research and simulator development and key decision makers from industry. Proceedings opened with a historical review of the role of simulation in medicine and an outline of priority areas related to the emerging role of simulation training within medicine broadly. Subsequent sessions addressed the summit's purposes: to review the current state of endoscopy simulation and the role it could play in endoscopic training, to define the role and value of simulators in the future of endoscopic training and to reach consensus regarding priority areas for simulation-related education and research and simulator development. This white paper provides an overview of the central points raised by presenters, synthesizes the discussions on the key issues under consideration, and outlines actionable items and/or areas of consensus reached by summit participants and society leadership pertinent to each session. The goal was to provide a working roadmap for the developers of simulators, the investigators who strive to define the optimal use of endoscopy-related simulation and assess its impact on educational outcomes and health care quality, and the educators who seek to enhance integration of simulation into training and practice.

A Single-center Review of Pediatric Colonoscopy Quality Indicators

OBJECTIVES

Colonoscopy with terminal ileal (TI) intubation is an important diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the care of children with digestive diseases, especially in those with inflammatory bowel disease. Ileal intubation rate is a recognized quality indicator for pediatric colonoscopy. Our primary aim was to identify our single-center ileal intubation rate and to secondarily identify specific factors, including bowel preparation quality, procedure duration, and cecal intubation rates which affect successful ileal intubation and by extension, complete colonoscopy.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of all colonoscopies in 2015 was completed, identifying 458 procedures. Sixty-seven patients were excluded, resulting in 391 colonoscopies reviewed.

RESULTS

We analyzed 391 colonoscopy procedures with a mean patient age of 14.4 ± 5.3 years. The most frequent primary indications for colonoscopy included abdominal pain with "red flag" symptoms (35.5%), known inflammatory bowel disease (25.1%), and isolated abdominal pain (11.5%). Ileal intubation was achieved in 91% of all colonoscopies, with a 94.4% cecal intubation rate. Failure of ileal and cecal intubations was classified into 4 categories: disease-related conditions, bowel preparation, technical aspects, and miscellaneous issues. Potentially modifiable factors accounted for the majority of cases of failed TI intubation. The mean colonoscopy time with and without successful TI intubation were 39 and 48.1 minutes, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Completion of colonoscopy to the TI is an essential part of a complete colonoscopy. TI intubation was possible in 91% of patients. This rate could potentially improve to 95% with optimization of modifiable factors such as improving bowel preparation or further refinement of endoscopic skills.

Influence of video-based feedback on self-assessment accuracy of endoscopic skills: a randomized controlled trial

Background and study aims  Novice endoscopists are inaccurate in self-assessment of procedures. One means of improving self-assessment accuracy is through video-based feedback. We aimed to determine the comparative effectiveness of three video-based interventions on novice endoscopists' self-assessment accuracy of endoscopic competence. Materials and methods  Novice endoscopists (performed < 20 previous procedures) were recruited. Participants completed a simulated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) on a virtual reality simulator. They were then randomized to one of three groups: self-video review (SVR), which involved watching a recorded video of their own performance; benchmark review (BVR), which involved watching a video of a simulated EGD completed by an expert; and self- and benchmark video (SBVR), which involved both videos. Participants then completed two additional simulated EGD cases. Self-assessments were conducted immediately after the first procedure, after the video intervention and after the additional two procedures. External assessments were conducted by two experienced endoscopists, who were blinded to participant identity and group assignment through video recordings. External and self-assessments were completed using the global rating scale component of the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool (GiECAT GRS). Results  Fifty-one participants completed the study. The BVR group had significantly improved self-assessment accuracy in the short-term, compared to the SBVR group ( P  = .005). The SBVR group demonstrated significantly improved self-assessment accuracy over time ( P  = .016). There were no significant effects of group or of time for the SVR group. Conclusions  Video-based interventions, particularly combined use of self- and benchmark video review, can improve accuracy of self-assessment of endoscopic competence among novices.

Eye gaze of endoscopists during simulated colonoscopy

Regaining orientation during an endoscopic procedure is critical. We investigated how endoscopists maintain orientation based on video and eye gaze analysis. Novices and experts performed a simulated colonoscopy procedure. Task performance was assessed by completion time, total distance traveled, maximum depth of insertion, percentage of mucosa viewed, and air insufflation volume. Procedure videos were analyzed by transfers among three viewing areas: center of bowel lumen, edge of bowel lumen, and other structure without bowel lumen in sight. Performers' gaze features were also examined over these viewing areas. Experts required less time to complete the procedure (P < 0.001). Novices' scope traveled a greater distance (P < 0.001) and more scope was inserted compared to an expert (P < 0.001). Novices also insufflated more air than experts (P < 0.001). Experts maintained the view of bowel lumen in the middle of the screen, while novices often left it on the edge (P = 0.032). When disorientation happened, novices brought the view to the edge more frequently than the center. However, experts were able to bring it back to the center directly. Eye tracking showed that the rate of saccades in experts increased when the bowel lumen moved away from the central view, such a behavior was not observed in novices. Maintaining a centered view of the bowel lumen is a strategy used by expert endoscopists. Video and eye tracking analysis revealed a key difference in eye gaze behavior when regaining orientation between novice and experienced endoscopists.

Direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) assessment in diagnostic gastroscopy: nationwide evidence of validity and competency development during training

Background

Validated competency assessment tools and the data supporting milestone development during gastroscopy training are lacking. We aimed to assess the validity of the formative direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) assessment tool in diagnostic gastroscopy and study competency development using DOPS.

Methods

This was a prospective multicentre (N = 275) analysis of formative gastroscopy DOPS assessments. Internal structure validity was tested using exploratory factor analysis and reliability estimated using generalisability theory. Item and global DOPS scores were stratified by lifetime procedure count to define learning curves, using a threshold determined from receiver operator characteristics (ROC) analysis. Multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of DOPS competence.

Results

In total, 10086 DOPS were submitted for 987 trainees. Exploratory factor analysis identified three distinct item groupings, representing ‘pre-procedure’, ‘technical’, and ‘post-procedure non-technical’ skills. From generalisability analyses, sources of variance in overall DOPS scores included trainee ability (31%), assessor stringency (8%), assessor subjectivity (18%), and trainee case-to-case variation (43%). The combination of three assessments from three assessors was sufficient to achieve the reliability threshold of 0.70. On ROC analysis, a mean score of 3.9 provided optimal sensitivity and specificity for determining competency. This threshold was attained in the order of ‘pre-procedure’ (100–124 procedures), ‘technical’ (150–174 procedures), ‘post-procedure non-technical’ skills (200–224 procedures), and global competency (225–249 procedures). Higher lifetime procedure count, DOPS count, surgical trainees and assessors, higher trainee seniority, and lower case difficulty were significant multivariable predictors of DOPS competence.

Conclusion

This study establishes milestones for competency acquisition during gastroscopy training and provides validity and reliability evidence to support gastroscopy DOPS as a competency assessment tool.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-019-06737-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorised users.

Simulation in endoscopy: Practical educational strategies to improve learning

In gastrointestinal endoscopy, simulation-based training can help endoscopists acquire new skills and accelerate the learning curve. Simulation creates an ideal environment for trainees, where they can practice specific skills, perform cases at their own pace, and make mistakes with no risk to patients. Educators also benefit from the use of simulators, as they can structure training according to learner needs and focus solely on the trainee. Not all simulation-based training, however, is effective. To maximize benefits from this instructional modality, educators must be conscious of learners' needs, the potential benefits of training, and associated costs. Simulation should be integrated into training in a manner that is grounded in educational theory and empirical data. In this review, we focus on four best practices in simulation-based education: deliberate practice with mastery learning, feedback and debriefing, contextual learning, and innovative educational strategies. For each topic, we provide definitions, supporting evidence, and practical tips for implementation.

The efficacy of a novel percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy simulator using three-dimensional printing technologies

BACKGROUND AND AIM

We developed a novel training simulator for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and determined its efficacy and realism in PEG insertion training.

METHODS

The gastrostomy simulator was made using three-dimensional printing and silicone molding technology. The simulator is of two types: pull type and introducer type. We enrolled 20 participants, comprising 10 beginners with no experience of PEG insertion and 10 PEG-experienced endoscopists. Each participant underwent two training sessions for the two simulator types. We recorded the simulation time, self-evaluation, and difficulty score based on a 5-score scale for PEG insertion among the participants. Subsequently, simulator performance was assessed via a questionnaire based on a 7-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

The mean time to completion of PEG simulation decreased from 11.9 (5.2) to 9.0 (4.0) min for the pull type and from 13.8 (7.0) to 12.0 (5.8) min for the introducer type in the beginner group. The mean self-evaluation scores of beginners increased from 2.2 (1.1) to 3.1 (0.7) (pull type) and from 2.2 (1.2) to 3.3 (0.8) (introducer type). The mean procedure difficulty scores of beginners decreased from 3.4 (1.1) to 2.7 (0.9) (pull type) and from 4.4 (0.5) to 3.0 (0.8) (introducer type). The improvement of skill score was 6.3 (1.2) for the beginner group. The general realism score of the simulator for handling was judged to be 6.0 (0.9) by the experienced group.

CONCLUSIONS

The three-dimensional-printed simulator for PEG insertion can be useful for training of beginner endoscopists and shows good efficacy and realism.

Protocol for a randomised trial evaluating the effect of applying gamification to simulation-based endoscopy training

BACKGROUND

Simulation-based training (SBT) provides a safe environment and effective means to enhance skills development. Simulation-based curricula have been developed for a number of procedures, including gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gamification, which is the application of game-design principles to non-game contexts, is an instructional strategy with potential to enhance learning. No studies have investigated the effects of a comprehensive gamification curriculum on the acquisition of endoscopic skills among novice endoscopists.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Thirty-six novice endoscopists will be randomised to one of two endoscopy SBT curricula: (1) the Conventional Curriculum Group, in which participants will receive 6 hours of one-on-one simulation training augmented with expert feedback and interlaced with 4 hours of small group teaching on the theory of colonoscopy or (2) the Gamified Curriculum Group, in which participants will receive the same curriculum with integration of the following game-design elements: a leaderboard summarising participants' performance, game narrative, achievement badges and rewards for top performance. In line with a progressive learning approach, simulation training for participants will progress from low to high complexity simulators, starting with a bench-top model and then moving to the EndoVR virtual reality simulator. Performance will be assessed at three points: pretraining, immediately post-training and 4-6 weeks after training. Assessments will take place on the simulator at all three time points and transfer of skills will be assessed during two clinical colonoscopies 4-6 weeks post-training. Mixed factorial ANOVAs will be used to determine if there is a performance difference between the two groups during simulated and clinical assessments.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained at St. Michael's Hospital. Results of this trial will be submitted for presentation at academic meetings and for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03176251.

Prospective cohort study of surgical trainee experience of access to gastrointestinal endoscopy training in the UK and Ireland

INTRODUCTION

Surgical trainees are reporting barriers to training in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. This snapshot survey aimed to gather data on variation in access to quality GI endoscopy training for Colorectal and Upper Gastrointestinal (GI) surgical trainees across the UK and Ireland.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online 20-point survey was designed and distributed nationally to surgical trainee members of the Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT), Dukes and The Roux Group (formerly Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland Trainees). The survey was designed in collaboration with The Roux Group for Upper GI trainees and the Dukes' Club for Colorectal trainees.

RESULTS

218 responses were received, most with a Colorectal or Upper GI sub-specialty interest (colorectal 56.0%; upper GI surgery 25.7%). Only 28.6% of trainees attended a dedicated training endoscopy list at least once a week with 28.1% not attending any at all. Less than half of trainees reported having endoscopy formally timetabled on rotas (36.9%). Most trainees (88.0%) encountered difficulties in gaining endoscopy training including lack of available lists (77.2%), conflicting operative commitments (59.4%), preferential allocation of lists to gastroenterology trainees (57.9%) and resistance from endoscopy departmental leads (38.6%). Regarding JAG accreditation, 77.1% respondents felt it should be mandatory prior to CCT with 80.3% believing this would lead to better access to dedicated endoscopy training equivalent to gastroenterology trainees. 93.1% trainees felt that attaining JAG accreditation by surgical trainees was important to patient care.

DISCUSSION

This study demonstrates significant barriers in accessing GI endoscopy training for general surgical trainees which urgently needs to be improved. In order to meet JAG training requirements for surgical trainees, a multifaceted collaborative approach from surgical and gastroenterology training bodies, local JAG trainers and the General Surgery SAC and JCST is required. This is to ensure that endoscopy is promoted and a robust model of training is successfully designed and delivered to general surgery trainees.

Changing from two- to one-operator colonoscopy insertion technique is feasible with similar quality outcomes

Background and Aim

Colonoscopy can be performed with two-operator (2OP) or one-operator (1OP) methods. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and colonoscopy quality outcomes for the two different colonoscopy insertion techniques.

Methods

One colonoscopist from Changhua Christian Hospital learned and changed the colonoscopy insertion technique from 2OP to 1OP during 2013. Real-life results of screening colonoscopies performed by this colonoscopist between these two insertion techniques (year 2012: 2OP vs year 2014: 1OP) were retrospectively reviewed and compared.

Results

In total, 219 screening colonoscopies were reviewed (2OP group, n = 103 vs 1OP group, n = 116). No differences were noted between both groups in terms of patient age, gender, weight, and height. The overall cecum intubation was 98.2%, adenoma detection rate (ADR) was 29.7%, and colonoscopy withdrawal time was 518.58 ± 972.04 s. On comparing colonoscopy quality outcomes between both methods, no differences were observed in cecal intubation rates (2OP vs 1OP: 100 vs 96.6%, P = 0.1626), ADR (28 vs 31%, P = 0.7401), and colonoscopy withdrawal time (454.88 ± 178.21 vs 576.92 ± 1325.01 s, P = 0.355). However, the 1OP group demonstrated significantly shorter colonoscopy insertion time (2OP vs 1OP: 298.28 ± 202.95 vs 216.21 ± 121.99 s, P = 0.003).

Conclusion

Colonoscopy quality outcomes were not impaired when one endoscopist changed the colonoscopy practice pattern from 2OP to 1OP. However, 1OP significantly shortened the colonoscopy insertion time.

The assessment of endosonographers in training

Endosonography (EUS) has an estimated long learning curve including the acquisition of both technical and cognitive skills. Trainees in EUS must learn to master intraprocedural steps such as echoendoscope handling and ultrasonographic imaging with the interpretation of normal anatomy and any pathology. In addition, there is a need to understand the periprocedural parts of the EUS-examination such as the indications and contraindications for EUS and potential adverse events that could occur post-EUS. However, the learning process and progress vary widely among endosonographers in training. Consequently, the performance of a certain number of supervised procedures during training does not automatically guarantee adequate competence in EUS. Instead, the assessment of EUS-competence should preferably be performed by the use of an assessment tool developed specifically for the evaluation of endosonographers in training. Such a tool, covering all the different steps of the EUS-procedure, would better depict the individual learning curve and better reflect the true competence of each trainee. This mini-review will address the issue of clinical education in EUS with respect to the evaluation of endosonographers in training. The aim of the article is to provide an informative overview of the topic. The relevant literature of the field will be reviewed and discussed. The current knowledge on how to assess the skills and competence of endosonographers in training is presented in detail.

Competence in Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography, From Training Through Independent Practice

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is unclear whether participation in competency-based fellowship programs for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) results in high-quality care in independent practice. We measured quality indicator (QI) adherence during the first year of independent practice among physicians who completed endoscopic training with a systematic assessment of competence.

METHODS

We performed a prospective multicenter cohort study of invited participants from 62 training programs. In phase 1, 24 advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs), from 20 programs, were assessed using a validated competence assessment tool. We used a comprehensive data collection and reporting system to create learning curves using cumulative sum analysis that were shared with AETs and trainers quarterly. In phase 2, participating AETs entered data into a database pertaining to every EUS and ERCP examination during their first year of independent practice, anchored by key QIs.

RESULTS

By the end of training, most AETs had achieved overall technical competence (EUS 91.7%, ERCP 73.9%) and cognitive competence (EUS 91.7%, ERCP 94.1%). In phase 2 of the study, 22 AETs (91.6%) participated and completed a median of 136 EUS examinations per AET and 116 ERCP examinations per AET. Most AETs met the performance thresholds for QIs in EUS (including 94.4% diagnostic rate of adequate samples and 83.8% diagnostic yield of malignancy in pancreatic masses) and ERCP (94.9% overall cannulation rate).

CONCLUSIONS

In this prospective multicenter study, we found that although competence cannot be confirmed for all AETs at the end of training, most meet QI thresholds for EUS and ERCP at the end of their first year of independent practice. This finding affirms the effectiveness of training programs. Clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT02509416.

What Makes a Good Endoscopic Teacher: A Qualitative Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Teaching learners to perform endoscopic procedures is challenging, yet effective endoscopy teaching practices are not well-described in the literature, and prior studies have focused on perspectives of supervising physicians rather than learners. We sought to characterize, from the perspective of endoscopy learners, endoscopic teaching behaviors perceived as beneficial and detrimental to learning using qualitative methods.

DESIGN

This is a prospective qualitative content analysis. Gastroenterology fellows from 2 tertiary care centers anonymously provided feedback regarding supervising physicians' teaching behaviors during endoscopic training between March 2016 and December 2016. Preprinted cards were completed at the conclusion of procedures to document behaviors that fellows perceived as enhancing or hampering their learning. Two investigators performed content analysis of written comments; each identified behavior was assigned positive or negative valence.

SETTING

Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, New York and University of California San Francisco in San Francisco, California. Both institutions are academic tertiary care centers.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 19 gastroenterology fellows at 2 training institutions participated.

RESULTS

A total of 239 teaching behaviors were identified by 19 fellows who worked with 31 supervising physicians; 29 unique behaviors were identified and organized into 7 themes: teaching, learning environment, autonomy, communication, coaching, feedback, and professionalism. Of all, 185 (77.4%) behaviors were reported as beneficial, and 54 (22.6%) as detrimental to the learning experience. Behaviors related to teaching were most often perceived as beneficial, while behaviors related to professionalism and communication were most often perceived as detrimental to learning.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific teaching behaviors may help or hinder learning of endoscopic skills. These behaviors may be useful for efforts related to teaching evaluation, faculty development, and direct teaching.

Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Endoscopy has traditionally been taught with novices practicing on real patients under the supervision of experienced endoscopists. Recently, the growing awareness of the need for patient safety has brought simulation training to the forefront. Simulation training can provide trainees with the chance to practice their skills in a learner-centred, risk-free environment. It is important to ensure that skills gained through simulation positively transfer to the clinical environment. This updated review was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) simulation training in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether virtual reality simulation training can supplement and/or replace early conventional endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) in diagnostic oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy, and/or sigmoidoscopy for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following health professions, educational, and computer databases until 12 July 2017: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL, AMED, ERIC, Education Full Text, CBCA Education, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Abstracts in New Technology and Engineering, Computer and Information Systems Abstracts, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. We also searched the grey literature until November 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials comparing VR endoscopy simulation training versus any other method of endoscopy training with outcomes measured on humans in the clinical setting, including conventional patient-based training, training using another form of endoscopy simulation, or no training. We also included trials comparing two different methods of VR training.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of trials, and extracted data on the trial characteristics and outcomes. We pooled data for meta-analysis where participant groups were similar, studies assessed the same intervention and comparator, and had similar definitions of outcome measures. We calculated risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We calculated mean difference (MD) and standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes when studies reported the same or different outcome measures, respectively. We used GRADE to rate the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 trials (421 participants; 3817 endoscopic procedures). We judged three trials as at low risk of bias. Ten trials compared VR training with no training, five trials with conventional endoscopy training, one trial with another form of endoscopy simulation training, and two trials compared two different methods of VR training. Due to substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity across our four comparisons, we did not perform a meta-analysis for several outcomes. We rated the quality of evidence as moderate, low, or very low due to risk of bias, imprecision, and heterogeneity.Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training: There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect on composite score of competency (MD 3.10, 95% CI -0.16 to 6.36; 1 trial, 24 procedures; low-quality evidence). Composite score of competency was based on 5-point Likert scales assessing seven domains: atraumatic technique, colonoscope advancement, use of instrument controls, flow of procedure, use of assistants, knowledge of specific procedure, and overall performance. Scoring range was from 7 to 35, a higher score representing a higher level of competence. Virtual reality training compared to no training likely provides participants with some benefit, as measured by independent procedure completion (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.26; 6 trials, 815 procedures; moderate-quality evidence). We evaluated overall rating of performance (MD 0.45, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.75; 1 trial, 18 procedures), visualisation of mucosa (MD 0.60, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.00; 1 trial, 55 procedures), performance time (MD -0.20 minutes, 95% CI -0.71 to 0.30; 2 trials, 29 procedures), and patient discomfort (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.68 to 0.35; 2 trials, 145 procedures), all with very low-quality evidence. No trials reported procedure-related complications or critical flaws (e.g. bleeding, luminal perforation) (3 trials, 550 procedures; moderate-quality evidence).Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient-based training: One trial reported composite score of competency but did not provide sufficient data for quantitative analysis. Virtual reality training compared to conventional patient-based training resulted in fewer independent procedure completions (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74; 2 trials, 174 procedures; low-quality evidence). We evaluated performance time (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.55 to 0.80; 2 trials, 34 procedures), overall rating of performance (MD -0.90, 95% CI -4.40 to 2.60; 1 trial, 16 procedures), and visualisation of mucosa (MD 0.0, 95% CI -6.02 to 6.02; 1 trial, 18 procedures), all with very low-quality evidence. Virtual reality training in combination with conventional training appears to be advantageous over VR training alone. No trials reported any procedure-related complications or critical flaws (3 trials, 72 procedures; very low-quality evidence).Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus another form of endoscopy simulation: Based on one study, there were no differences between groups with respect to composite score of competency, performance time, and visualisation of mucosa. Virtual reality training in combination with another form of endoscopy simulation training did not appear to confer any benefit compared to VR training alone.Two methods of virtual reality training: Based on one study, a structured VR simulation-based training curriculum compared to self regulated learning on a VR simulator appears to provide benefit with respect to a composite score evaluating competency. Based on another study, a progressive-learning curriculum that sequentially increases task difficulty provides benefit with respect to a composite score of competency over the structured VR training curriculum.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

VR simulation-based training can be used to supplement early conventional endoscopy training for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience. However, we found insufficient evidence to advise for or against the use of VR simulation-based training as a replacement for early conventional endoscopy training. The quality of the current evidence was low due to inadequate randomisation, allocation concealment, and/or blinding of outcome assessment in several trials. Further trials are needed that are at low risk of bias, utilise outcome measures with strong evidence of validity and reliability, and examine the optimal nature and duration of training.

Training in Endoscopy

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Progress towards the goal of high-quality endoscopy across health economies has been founded on high-quality structured training programmes linked to credentialing practice and ongoing performance monitoring. This review appraises the recent literature on training interventions, which may benefit performance and competency acquisition in novice endoscopy trainees.

RECENT FINDINGS

Increasing data on the learning curves for different endoscopic procedures has highlighted variations in performance amongst trainees. These differences may be dependent on the trainee, trainer and training programme. Evidence of the benefit of knowledge-based training, simulation training, hands-on courses and clinical training is available to inform the planning of ideal training pathway elements. The validation of performance assessment measures and global competency tools now also provides evidence on the effectiveness of training programmes to influence the learning curve. The impact of technological advances and intelligent metrics from national databases is also predicted to drive improvements and efficiencies in training programme design and monitoring of post-training outcomes. Training in endoscopy may be augmented through a series of pre-training and in-training interventions. In conjunction with performance metrics, these evidence-based interventions could be implemented into training pathways to optimise and quality assure training in endoscopy.

Quality in endoscopy training-the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography case

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is one of the most advanced therapeutic procedures in gastrointestinal endoscopy. It is highly operator-dependent procedure requiring specific, knowledge-based training in order to achieve competence. Strategies for assessing competency of trainees and those in practice include numbers of procedures performed, and subjective or objective assessment by a mentor or self-assessment by the trainee. However, it is still not clear how to measure the quality in (ERCP) training in an objective and reproducible way, so far. Thus, in this article, we will discuss issues related to training in ERCP and provide experience based discussion on how to best approach and master this complex and risky procedure.

Trends in UK endoscopy training in the BSG trainees' national survey and strategic planning for the future

BACKGROUND

Improvements in the structure of endoscopy training programmes resulting in certification from the Joint Advisory Group in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy have been acknowledged to improve training experience and contribute to enhanced colonoscopy performance.

OBJECTIVES

The 2016 British Society of Gastroenterology trainees' survey of endoscopy training explored the delivery of endoscopy training - access to lists; level of supervision and trainee's progression through diagnostic, core therapy and subspecialty training. In addition, the barriers to endoscopy training progress and utility of training tools were examined.

METHODS

A web-based survey (Survey Monkey) was sent to all higher specialty gastroenterology trainees.

RESULTS

There were some improvements in relation to earlier surveys; 85% of trainees were satisfied with the level of supervision of their training. But there were ongoing problems; 12.5% of trainees had no access to a regular training list, and 53% of final year trainees had yet to achieve full certification in colonoscopy. 9% of final year trainees did not feel confident in endoscopic management of upper GI bleeds.

CONCLUSIONS

The survey findings provide a challenge to those agencies tasked with supporting endoscopy training in the UK. Acknowledging the findings of the survey, the paper provides a strategic response with reference to increased service pressures, reduced overall training time in specialty training programmes and the requirement to support general medical and surgical on-call commitments. It describes the steps required to improve training on the ground: delivering additional training tools and learning resources, and introducing certification standards for therapeutic modalities in parallel with goals for improving the quality of endoscopy in the UK.

Basic training in digestive endoscopy for resident physicians in gastroenterology. Recommendations by the Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva (SEED)

Digestive endoscopy is the most effective tool available for the diagnosis of multiple gastrointestinal (GI) tract conditions, and it represents a key aspect in the training of gastroenterology residents according to the Spanish MIR (médico interno residente) program. The Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva (SEED), aware of all the technical advances that have emerged during the past few years, deems it necessary to define a program of the skills specialists-in-training in gastroenterology should acquire during their residency. This paper describes the goals of endoscopy training, the techniques that should be mastered, and the diagnostic and therapeutic skills this specialty requires. Finally, a model is suggested for the assessment of competence.

Face and construct validity of a novel mechanical ERCP simulator

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 Simulation-based training has become an important pillar in competence-based medicine. However, limited data are available on use of simulators in training for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We aimed to determine the face and construct validity of the Boškoski-Costamagna mechanical ERCP Trainer, and to assess its didactic value, as judged by experts.

METHODS

 Participants were divided into four groups based on ERCP lifetime experience: novices, intermediate, experienced, and experts. Participants performed several standardized assignments on the simulator. Outcome parameters included times to complete the procedure, ability to cannulate both ducts, number of attempts to cannulate the common bile duct and pancreatic duct, number of inadvertent pancreatic duct cannulations, successful stent placement, and successful stone extraction. All experts filled out a questionnaire on the simulator's realism and didactic value.

RESULTS

Novices (n = 11) completed the total procedure in 21:09 (min:sec), intermediates (n = 5) in 10:58, experienced (n = 8) in 06:42 and experts (n = 22) in 06:05. Experts were significantly faster than novices (Kruskal-Wallis test P  < 0.000). Experts rated the realism of the simulator 7.12 on a 10-point Likert scale. The simulator's potential as a tool for training novices was rated 3.91 on a four-point Likert scale, and there was a high agreement among experts to include the simulator in the training of novice endoscopists (3.86 on a four-point Likert scale).

CONCLUSIONS

The novel Boškoski-Costamagna ERCP simulator demonstrates good face and construct validity. ERCP experts highly agree on the didactic value and added value of this simulator in the training curriculum for novice endoscopists.

Advances and Challenges in Endoscopic Training

One of the challenges of the current era is ensuring that endoscopic training is accomplished effectively in the face of multiple competing demands. As health care delivery evolves, with rising patient complexity and increasing productivity requirements, there is mounting pressure on the time available for training in the clinical setting. The practice of endoscopy itself continues to expand to include increasingly complex procedures (eg, therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound, endoscopic submucosal dissection, and peroral endoscopic myotomy) that require dedicated endoscopy training. The rapid pace of progress in the field of endoscopy means that the demand for endoscopy training is not limited to the formal period of training, but instead spans the spectrum to include physicians already in practice. In light of recent advances in our understanding of endoscopy training, this review will serve to highlight the current state of affairs with respect to endoscopic training and how we can consider approaching these challenges.

Endoscopic training: A nationwide survey of French fellows in gastroenterology

BACKGROUND

During their 4 years of training, French fellows in gastroenterology should acquire theoretical and practical competency in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy.

AIMS

To evaluate the delivery of endoscopy training to French GI fellows and perception of learning.

METHODS

A nationwide electronic survey was carried out of French GI fellows using an anonymous, 17-item electronic questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 291 out of 484 (60%) GI fellows responded to the survey. Only 40% of subjects had access to theoretical training and/or virtual simulators. Only 49% and 35% of fourth year fellows had reached the threshold numbers of EGD and colonoscopies recommended by the European section and Board of gastroenterology and hepatology. Sixty-two percent and 57% of trainees reported having insufficient knowledge in interpreting gastric and colic lesions. Access to dedicated endoscopy activity for at least 8 weeks during the year was the only independent factor associated with the achievement of the recommended annual threshold number of procedures.

CONCLUSION

The access of fellows to theoretical training and to preclinical virtual simulators is still insufficient. Personalized support and regular assessment of cognitive and technical acquisition over the 4 years of training seems to be necessary.

Impact of experience on self-assessment accuracy of clinical colonoscopy competence

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Self-assessment is important for life-long learning and a recommended assessment method for endoscopy skills. Prior literature has not investigated self-assessment accuracy of colonoscopic competence in the clinical setting. This study aimed to determine the self-assessment accuracy of novice, intermediate, and experienced endoscopists.

METHODS

Novice (performed <50 previous colonoscopies), intermediate (50-500), and experienced (>1000) endoscopists from 5 hospitals each performed a clinical colonoscopy. Video recordings of procedures were independently assessed by 2 blinded expert endoscopists by using the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool (GiECAT). Externally assessed and self-assessed GiECAT scores were defined as the mean of the 2 video-based ratings and as participants' own assigned ratings, respectively. Self-assessment accuracy between the externally assessed and self-assessed scores was evaluated by using absolute difference scores, intraclass correlation coefficients, and the Bland-Altman analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty novice, 10 intermediate, and 10 experienced endoscopists participated. There was moderate agreement of externally assessed and self-assessed GiECAT scores, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.65 (95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.80). The absolute difference scores among the 3 groups were significantly different (P = .002), with experienced endoscopists demonstrating a more accurate self-assessment ability compared with novices (P = .002). Bland-Altman plots suggest that novice and experienced endoscopists tend to overrate and underrate their clinical competence, respectively; no specific trends were associated with intermediates.

CONCLUSION

Participants demonstrated moderate self-assessment accuracy of clinical competence. Endoscopist experience was positively associated with self-assessment accuracy; novices demonstrated lower self-assessment accuracy compared with experienced endoscopists. Moreover, novices tended to overestimate their performances. Novice endoscopists may benefit from targeted interventions to improve self-assessment accuracy.

A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Learning Curves and Competence in Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Among Advanced Endoscopy Trainees: The Rapid Assessment of Trainee Endoscopy Skills Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

On the basis of the Next Accreditation System, trainee assessment should occur on a continuous basis with individualized feedback. We aimed to validate endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) learning curves among advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs) by using a large national sample of training programs and to develop a centralized database that allows assessment of performance in relation to peers.

METHODS

ASGE recognized training programs were invited to participate, and AETs were graded on ERCP and EUS exams by using a validated competency assessment tool that assesses technical and cognitive competence in a continuous fashion. Grading for each skill was done by using a 4-point scoring system, and a comprehensive data collection and reporting system was built to create learning curves by using cumulative sum analysis. Individual results and benchmarking to peers were shared with AETs and trainers quarterly.

RESULTS

Of the 62 programs invited, 20 programs and 22 AETs participated in this study. At the end of training, median number of EUS and ERCP performed/AET was 300 (range, 155-650) and 350 (125-500), respectively. Overall, 3786 exams were graded (EUS, 1137; ERCP-biliary, 2280; ERCP-pancreatic, 369). Learning curves for individual end points and overall technical/cognitive aspects in EUS and ERCP demonstrated substantial variability and were successfully shared with all programs. The majority of trainees achieved overall technical (EUS, 82%; ERCP, 60%) and cognitive (EUS, 76%; ERCP, 100%) competence at conclusion of training.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate the feasibility of establishing a centralized database to report individualized learning curves and confirm the substantial variability in time to achieve competence among AETs in EUS and ERCP. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02509416.

Training in Endoscopy: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy

Gastrointestinal endoscopy is important in diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of many diseases of the digestive tract. The ability to perform esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) safely, effectively, and efficiently has become the mainstay of gastroenterology practice. In Korea, EGD education is usually imparted as a component of gastroenterology training programs during fellowship. In this review, we discuss the general principles of EGD training. Formal curriculum development with devising clear goals and effective training methods should be developed in the future.

Training and proficiency in endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration: A systematic review

Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS)-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) is currently the modality of choice for evaluation of mediastinal lymphadenopathy. However, there is still uncertainty regarding the training methodology and the number of procedures required to attain proficiency in EBUS. Herein, we performed a systematic review of studies selected from PubMed, EmBase and Scopus databases describing the training and assessment of proficiency during EBUS, specifically studies investigating various methods for training, its outcome and the number of procedures required to overcome the learning curve for EBUS. Twenty-seven (simulator-based learning (n = 8), tools for assessing competence in EBUS-TBNA (n = 5) and threshold numbers needed to attain proficiency in EBUS-TBNA (n = 16)) studies were identified. An EBUS simulator accurately stratified individuals based on the level of experience in performing EBUS. Training received on a simulator was comparable with traditional apprentice-based training. Importantly, skills acquired on a simulator could be transferred to real-world patients. The number needed to overcome the initial learning curve of EBUS varied from 10 to 100 in individual studies with a mean of 37-44 procedures. Tools such as EBUS-STAT (EBUS skill and task assessment tool) and EBUSAT (EBUS skill and assessment tool) were effective in evaluating the EBUS trainees. We conclude that an EBUS simulator or EBUS assessment tools can objectively assess the training of an EBUS trainee. Simulator-based training is a useful modality in EBUS training. The number of procedures needed to overcome the initial learning curve is about 40. Centres involved in EBUS training could incorporate simulator-based training in their curriculum before allowing operators to perform EBUS on patients.

Combining different methods improves assessment of competence in colonoscopy

OBJECTIVES

To develop a reliable method of assessing competence in colonoscopy based on multiple sources.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Physicians with varying degrees of experience in colonoscopy performed two colonoscopies each in a standardized simulated environment. Their performances were assessed under direct observation by an expert rater and by automatic computerized analysis of operator movements and scope movements, respectively. Reliability (Cronbach's alpha) for subjective assessment, time to cecum, analysis of operator movement and analysis of scope movements were calculated. Composite score calculations were used to explore different combinations of the measures.

RESULTS

Twenty physicians were included in the study. The reliability (Cronbach's alpha) were 0.92, 0.57, 0.87 and 0.55 for the subjective score assessed under direct observation, time to cecum, distance between operator's hands and colonoscopy progression score, respectively. Equal weight (=25%) to all four methods resulted in a reliability of 0.91 and optimal weighting of the methods (55%, 10%, 25% and 10%, respectively) resulted in a maximum reliability of 0.95.

CONCLUSION

Combining subjective expert ratings with automated objective assessments results in a less biased and more reliable assessment of competence in colonoscopy.

When trainees reach competency in performing endoscopic ultrasound: a systematic review

Background/Study aim The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) recommends that trainees complete 150 endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) procedures before assessing competency. However, this recommendation is largely based on limited evidence and expert opinion. With new evidence suggesting that this historical threshold is underestimating training requirements, we evaluated the learning curve for achieving competency in EUS. Patients/Materials and methods Two investigators independently searched MEDLINE for full-text citations assessing the learning curve for achieving competency in EUS in the period 1946 to 25 March 2016. A learning curve was defined as either a tabulated or graphic representation of competency as a function of increasing EUS experience. Results Eight studies assessing 28 trainees and 7051 EUS procedures were included. When stratifying studies based on procedural indication: three studies assessed competency in evaluating mucosal lesions, three studies assessed competency in EUS fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), and two studies assessed comprehensive competency. Among studies assessing mucosal lesion T-staging accuracy, competency was achieved by 65 to 231 procedures. Among studies assessing EUS-FNA, competency was achieved by 30 to 40 procedures. Among the two studies assessing comprehensive competency in EUS, competency was not achieved in either study across all trainees. Only four of 17 trainees reached competency by 225 to 295 EUS procedures. Conclusion As EUS competency assessment has evolved to more closely reflect independent clinical practice, the number of procedures required to achieve competency has risen well above ASGE recommendations. Advanced endoscopy training programs and specialty societies need to re-assess the structure of EUS training.

Measures of trainee performance in advanced endoscopy: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The diversity, technical skills required, and risk inherent to advanced endoscopy techniques all contribute to complex training curricula and steep learning curves. Since trainees develop endoscopy skills at different rates, there has been a shift towards competency-based training and certification. Validated endoscopy performance measures for trainees are, therefore, necessary. The aim of this systematic review was to describe and critically assess the existing evidence regarding measures of performance for trainees in advanced endoscopy.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature from January 1980 to January 2016 was carried out using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ISI Web of knowledge databases. MeSH terms related to 'advanced endoscopy' and 'performance' were applied to a highly sensitive search strategy. The main outcomes were face, content, and construct validity, as well as reliability.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 1,662 studies and 77 met the inclusion criteria after abstract and full-text review (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)=23, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)=30, colonoscopic polypectomy (CP)=11, balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE)=7, luminal stenting=3, radiofrequency ablation (RFA)=2, and endoscopic muscosal resection (EMR)=1). Good validity and reliability were found for measurement tools of overall performance in ERCP, EUS and CP, with applications for both patient-based and simulator training models. A number of specific technical skills were also shown to be valid measures of performance. These include: selective biliary cannulation, sphincterotomy, biliary stent placement, stone extraction and procedure time for ERCP; pancreatic solid mass T-staging, EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) procedure time, number of EUS-FNA passes and puncture precision for EUS; procedure time and en bloc resection rate for CP; retrograde fluoroscopy time for BAE; and mean number of endoscopy sessions required to achieve complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CIEM) for RFA. The evidence for EMR and luminal stenting is of insufficient quality to make recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified multiple valid and readily available performance measures for advanced endoscopy trainees for ERCP, EUS, CP, BAE and RFA procedures. These tools should be considered in advanced endoscopy training programs wishing to move away from apprenticeship-based training and towards competency-based learning with the help of patient-based and simulator tools.