Training and competence assessment in GI endoscopy: a systematic review

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.

Learning curve for endoscopy training: Is it all about numbers?

Endoscopy training is an important component of postgraduate gastroenterology and general surgery programs. Proficiency in endoscopy requires the development of several tangible and intangible skills. Much attention has traditionally been paid to establishing a threshold, or minimum procedural volume during the training period, which is necessary for a trainee to achieve competence in endoscopy by the conclusion of his or her program. However, despite several attempts to characterize this target, it has become clear in recent years that training programs need to consider other factors rather than relying on this measure as the sole marker of trainee competency. Here, we present a review of general concepts in endoscopy skills acquisition that affect the learning curve, the evolving definition of competency as it relates to procedural volume, the role of simulation in endoscopy training, and the concept of massed versus spaced delivery of endoscopy training.

Assessments and skills improvement for endoscopists

Different countries employ a range of assessment methods to monitor trainees from novice to independent practice. The optimal method to monitor and assess individuals' training in endoscopy has not been formally determined. The UK has developed a competency based assessment training and certification (credentialing) programme. The tools developed to provide endoscopy work based assessments (DOPS) have been validated and are used for trainees and independent endoscopists, providing formative feedback for targeted training. Summative assessments are used for trainee certification and independent colonoscopists wishing to provide part of the National Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. The UK was able to develop both clinical standards and an endoscopy training and certification process applied to all individuals and monitored by a single professional body. The supporting IT system enabled a structured and robust quality assurance process to be applied to all individuals and endoscopy units. Assessment of practising endoscopists relies on the development and measurement of surrogate measures, which represent key performance indicators for those individuals. These surrogates for performance are still evolving although they are now well established for colonoscopy practice. Monitoring of independent practice is dependent on clinical audit of these key performance indicators. Feedback of data to individuals helps benchmarking and identification of those with sub-optimal performance. Independent endoscopists now recognize the benefit of on-going training to help both skills development and to address sub-optimal performance. This chapter describes how the UK developed a web-based integrated training and certification system.

Simulator training in gastrointestinal endoscopy - From basic training to advanced endoscopic procedures

Simulator-based gastrointestinal endoscopy training has gained acceptance over the last decades and has been extensively studied. Several types of simulators have been validated and it has been demonstrated that the use of simulators in the early training setting accelerates the learning curve in acquiring basic skills. Current GI endoscopy simulators lack the degree of realism that would be necessary to provide training to achieve full competency or to be applicable in certification. Virtual Reality and mechanical simulators are commonly used in basic flexible endoscopy training, whereas ex vivo and in vivo models are used in training the most advanced endoscopic procedures. Validated models for the training of more routine therapeutic interventions like polypectomy, EMR, stenting and haemostasis are lacking or scarce and developments in these areas should be encouraged.

Polypectomy skills of gastroenterology fellows: can we improve them?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Currently, most training programs for gastroenterology (GI) fellows lack systematic training in polypectomy. Systematic education and direct feedback with the direct observational polypectomy skills (DOPyS) method is a simple and inexpensive way to train GI fellows in practical endoscopy. Our primary aim was to evaluate whether a lecture-based training course could improve the polypectomy skills of GI fellows. As a secondary aim, the interobserver agreement among the three assessors was evaluated.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

We invited GI fellows to record five polypectomies, after which they attended a training course consisting of three lectures on polyps and polypectomy methods given by expert endoscopists. After training, the fellows recorded five polypectomies again. All videos were blindly assessed by three expert endoscopists, who used the DOPyS method.

RESULTS

Eight GI fellows participated in this study. There was no significant difference in the median overall competency scores before and after training; before training, 25 % (10/40) of the polypectomies were scored as "pass," compared with 37.5 % (15/40) after training (P = 0.56). The interobserver agreement among the experts was fair (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.34, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.14 - 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Our lecture-based training course did not result in an improvement in overall competency scores for the polypectomy skills of GI fellows. Besides, the overall quality of the polypectomy techniques of the fellows was considered low. To optimize polypectomy training and competency, we believe that direct feedback in the endoscopy suite and hands-on training by dedicated teachers are essential.