Measures of trainee performance in advanced endoscopy: A systematic review

UK and Ireland Joint Advisory Group (JAG) consensus statements for training and certification in diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

International endoscopy societies vary in their approach for credentialing individuals in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) to enable independent practice; however, there is no consensus in this or its implementation. In 2019, the Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy (JAG) commissioned a working group to examine the evidence relating to this process for EUS. The aim of this was to develop evidence-based recommendations for EUS training and certification in the UK.

METHODS

Under the oversight of the JAG quality assurance team, a modified Delphi process was conducted which included major stakeholders from the UK and Ireland. A formal literature review was made, initial questions for study were proposed and recommendations for training and certification in EUS were formulated after a rigorous assessment using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool and subjected to electronic voting to identify accepted statements. These were peer reviewed by JAG and relevant stakeholder societies before consensus on the final EUS certification pathway was achieved.

RESULTS

39 initial questions were proposed of which 33 were deemed worthy of assessment and finally formed the key recommendations. The statements covered four key domains, such as: definition of competence (13 statements), acquisition of competence (10), assessment of competence (5) and postcertification mentorship (5). Key recommendations include: (1) minimum of 250 hands-on cases before an assessment for competency can be made, (2) attendance at the JAG basic EUS course, (3) completing a minimum of one formative direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) every 10 cases to allow the learning curve in EUS training to be adequately studied, (4) competent performance in summative DOPS assessments and (5) a period of mentorship over a 12-month period is recommended as minimum to support and mentor new service providers.

CONCLUSIONS

An evidence-based certification pathway has been commissioned by JAG to support and quality assure EUS training. This will form the basis to improve quality of training and safety standards in EUS in the UK and Ireland.

Validity evidence for observational ERCP competency assessment tools: a systematic review

BACKGROUND : Assessment of competence in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is critical for supporting learning and documenting attainment of skill. Validity evidence supporting ERCP observational assessment tools has not been systematically evaluated. METHODS : We conducted a systematic search using electronic databases and hand-searching from inception until August 2021 for studies evaluating observational assessment tools of ERCP performance. We used a unified validity framework to characterize validity evidence from five sources: content, response process, internal structure, relations to other variables, and consequences. Each domain was assigned a score of 0-3 (maximum score 15). We assessed educational utility and methodological quality using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education framework and the Medical Education Research Quality Instrument, respectively. RESULTS : From 2769 records, we included 17 studies evaluating 7 assessment tools. Five tools were studied for clinical ERCP, one for simulated ERCP, and one for simulated and clinical ERCP. Validity evidence scores ranged from 2 to 12. The Bethesda ERCP Skills Assessment Tool (BESAT), ERCP Direct Observation of Procedural Skills Tool (ERCP DOPS), and The Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) and ERCP Skills Assessment Tool (TEESAT) had the strongest validity evidence, with scores of 10, 12, and 11, respectively. Regarding educational utility, most tools were easy to use and interpret, and required minimal additional resources. Overall methodological quality (maximum score 13.5) was strong, with scores ranging from 10 to 12.5. CONCLUSIONS : The BESAT, ERCP DOPS, and TEESAT had strong validity evidence compared with other assessments. Integrating tools into training may help drive learners' development and support competency decision making.

Learning curves in ERCP during advanced endoscopy training: a Canadian multicenter prospective study

Background and study aims  Growing emphasis on quality and patient safety has supported the shift toward competency-based medical education for advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs). In this study, we aimed to examine Canadian AETs learning curves and achievement of competence using an ERCP assessment tool with strong evidence of validity. Methods  This prospective study was conducted at five institutions across Canada from 2017-2018. Data on every fifth procedure performed by trainees were collected using the United Kingdom Joint Advisory Joint Advisory Group of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) ERCP Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) tool, which includes a four-point rating scale for 27 items. Cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was used to create learning curves for overall supervision ratings and ERCP DOPS items by plotting scores for procedures performed during training. Results  Eleven trainees who were evaluated for 261 procedures comprised our sample. The median number of evaluations by site was 49 (Interquartile range (IQR) 31-76) and by trainee was 15 (IQR 11-45). The overall cannulation rate by trainees was 82 % (241/261), and the native papilla cannulation rate was 78 % (149/191). All trainees achieved competence in the "overall supervision" domain of the ERCP DOPS by the end of their fellowship. Trainees achieved competency in all individual domains, except for tissue sampling and sphincteroplasty. Conclusions  Canadian AETs are graduating from fellowship programs with acceptable levels of competence for overall ERCP performance and for the most specific tasks. Learning curves may help identify areas of deficiency that may require supplementary training, such as tissue sampling.

Training and certification of EUS operators in China

Background and Objectives:

EUS has become a very frequently used procedure for both diagnostic and therapeutic indications. However, skilled operators are essential for improved outcomes and patient safety which make efficient training and certification programs essential. Our aim was to explore the acquisition and assessment of EUS competencies in China as practiced in the past, today, and in the future.

Methods:

We identified key opinion leaders (KOLs) from hospitals in different cities in China. Each KOL answered 43 questions regarding demographics and EUS experience, their learning experience as a trainee, experience as a supervisor, and their thoughts about current and future training. Descriptive statistics were used for reporting the results.

Results:

Eleven men and five females from eight major Chinese cities (Beijing, Changsha, Chengdu, Chongqing, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Shenzhen, and Wuhan) were included. They offered a good variance regarding age (33–53 years old), EUS experience (½–20 years), and performed procedures (20–6000 procedures). Most (n = 13) learned EUS through apprenticeship training model but three were self-taught. The KOLs also used the apprenticeship model to train their own trainees. First, they demonstrated EUS for median 2 months before their trainees took over the scope and performed a median 50 supervised procedures during a median of 3 months. Then they were allowed to perform EUS procedures independently. Simulation-based training and standardized assessment of competence were used very sparingly, but most of the KOLs wanted to shift towards these contemporary methods in the future.

Conclusions:

The classical apprenticeship training is still used to learn EUS in China and the amount of training required before being allowed to practice independently varies considerably. Several of the KOLs requested improved conditions for training and wanted a standardized curriculum leading to certification of new EUS operators based on a valid assessment of competence.

Comparing Outcomes Following Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage Versus Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The aim of this study was to explore the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTCD) in patients with malignant biliary obstruction and failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify studies reporting outcomes comparing EUS-BD and PTCD. Results: We identified 9 studies involving 469 patients. Technical success was similar for EUS-BD and PTCD (odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17-3.30; P = .71). EUS-BD was associated with higher clinical success versus PTCD (OR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.15-3.87; P = .02) in all studies. However, there was no significant difference between groups in studies using self-expandable metal stents (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.06-2.00; P = .24). The reported adverse event rate was significantly lower for EUS-BD compared with PTCD (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.22-0.52; P < .00001). Conclusion: The available literature suggests that EUS-BD is associated with fewer adverse events, greater clinical success, and comparable technical success compared with PTCD. According to the shortcomings of our study, more large, high-quality, randomized controlled trials are needed to compare these techniques and confirm our findings.

Device-assisted enteroscopy training. A rapid review

Device-assisted enteroscopy is currently lacking a validated training model, in contrast to the other major technique used for the study of the small bowel, namely capsule endoscopy. Training should be based on defining and achieving competency for the acquisition of the knowledge and skills required to perform enteroscopy in a safe and effective manner. The need for training is clear, since the technique is considered an advanced endoscopy form that requires maneuvers that differ from the usual ones that must be learned, in addition to specific equipment. Therefore, the ideal candidates for this training include professionals with accredited experience in therapeutic digestive endoscopy. Amongst the recommendations issued regarding device-assisted enteroscopy training, the estimation of small-bowel insertion depth and the choice of the examination route, whether oral or anal, should be highlighted. Learning curve descriptions have the limitation of being explorer-dependent with no consensus on the parameter that should be selected to establish a correct learning curve in enteroscopy. The most commonly used parameter is insertion depth. The few training models that have been proposed recommend using a highly useful tool, namely simulators and to start practicing under expert guidance. Based on the variability of published data, an experienced endoscopist may perform enteroscopy in a safe and effective manner after 5 to 35 training procedures. Although reaching the expert level requires prolonged clinical practice with exposure to the various disorders of the small bowel.

Evaluation of a European-wide survey on paediatric endoscopy training

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate quality of paediatric endoscopy training of Young members of the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN).

METHODS

An online questionnaire designed by the Young ESPGHAN Committee was sent to 125 Young ESPGHAN members between February 2014 and September 2015. The questionnaire comprised 32 questions addressing some general information of the participants and the structure of their paediatric gastroenterology, hepatology and nutrition programmes; procedural volume and terminal ileal intubation (TII) rate; supervision, assessments, participation in endoscopy courses and simulator training; and satisfaction with endoscopy training and self-perceived competency.

RESULTS

Of 68 participants, 48 (71%) were enrolled in an official training programme. All alumni (n=31) were trained in endoscopy. They completed a median of 200 oesophagogastroduodenoscopies (OGDs) and 75 ileocolonoscopies (ICs) with a TII rate of >90% in 43%. There is a significant difference in numbers of ICs between the TII rate groups >90%, 50%-90% and <50% (median 150 vs 38 vs 55) (p<0.001). 11 alumni (35%) followed the ESPGHAN Syllabus during training. 25 alumni (81%) attended basic skills endoscopy courses and 19 (61%) experienced simulator training. 71% of the alumni were '(very) satisfied' with their diagnostic OGD, while 52% were '(very) satisfied' with their IC training. The alumni felt safe to independently perform OGDs in 84% and ICs in 71% after their training.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite reaching the suggested procedural endoscopy volumes, a rather low TII rate of >90% calls for end-of-training certifications based on the achievement of milestones of competency.

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.

Machine Learning Creates a Simple Endoscopic Classification System that Improves Dysplasia Detection in Barrett's Oesophagus amongst Non-expert Endoscopists

Introduction

Barrett's oesophagus (BE) is a precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC). Endoscopic surveillance is performed to detect dysplasia arising in BE as it is likely to be amenable to curative treatment. At present, there are no guidelines on who should perform surveillance endoscopy in BE. Machine learning (ML) is a branch of artificial intelligence (AI) that generates simple rules, known as decision trees (DTs). We hypothesised that a DT generated from recognised expert endoscopists could be used to improve dysplasia detection in non-expert endoscopists. To our knowledge, ML has never been applied in this manner.

Methods

Video recordings were collected from patients with non-dysplastic (ND-BE) and dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus (D-BE) undergoing high-definition endoscopy with i-Scan enhancement (PENTAX®). A strict protocol was used to record areas of interest after which a corresponding biopsy was taken to confirm the histological diagnosis. In a blinded manner, videos were shown to 3 experts who were asked to interpret them based on their mucosal and microvasculature patterns and presence of nodularity and ulceration as well as overall suspected diagnosis. Data generated were entered into the WEKA package to construct a DT for dysplasia prediction. Non-expert endoscopists (gastroenterology specialist registrars in training with variable experience and undergraduate medical students with no experience) were asked to score these same videos both before and after web-based training using the DT constructed from the expert opinion. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity values were calculated before and after training where p < 0.05 was statistically significant.

Results

Videos from 40 patients were collected including 12 both before and after acetic acid (ACA) application. Experts' average accuracy for dysplasia prediction was 88%. When experts' answers were entered into a DT, the resultant decision model had a 92% accuracy with a mean sensitivity and specificity of 97% and 88%, respectively. Addition of ACA did not improve dysplasia detection. Untrained medical students tended to have a high sensitivity but poor specificity as they "overcalled" normal areas. Gastroenterology trainees did the opposite with overall low sensitivity but high specificity. Detection improved significantly and accuracy rose in both groups after formal web-based training although it did it reach the accuracy generated by experts. For trainees, sensitivity rose significantly from 71% to 83% with minimal loss of specificity. Specificity rose sharply in students from 31% to 49% with no loss of sensitivity.

Conclusion

ML is able to define rules learnt from expert opinion. These generate a simple algorithm to accurately predict dysplasia. Once taught to non-experts, the algorithm significantly improves their rate of dysplasia detection. This opens the door to standardised training and assessment of competence for those who perform endoscopy in BE. It may shorten the learning curve and might also be used to compare competence of trainees with recognised experts as part of their accreditation process.

Quality and competence in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography - Where are we 50 years later?

Training in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) requires the development of technical, cognitive, and integrative skills well beyond those needed for standard endoscopic procedures. So far, there are limited data regarding what constitutes competency in ERCP, including achievement and maintenance. Recent studies have highlighted overall procedural numbers are not enough to warrant competency, although more is better. We performed a comprehensive literature search until June 2017 using predetermined search terms to identify relevant articles and summarized their results as a narrative review. Selective native papilla deep cannulation should be used as a benchmark for assessing successful cannulation. Accurate and validated ERCP performance measures are needed to develop a curriculum that allows transition from numbers-based competency. However, available guidelines fail to state what degree of hands-on involvement is required by the trainee for the case to be counted in their overall procedural numbers. Qualitative assessment of competency should be done by trained raters using specially designed assessment tools. Competence continues to increase with practice following formal training in a fairly steady manner. The learning curve for overall common bile duct cannulation success may be a readily available surrogate for individual trainee progression and may correspond to learning curves for therapeutic interventions.

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.

When to let the fellow do the procedure

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In complex endoscopies, the initial attempt is often associated with the highest success and subsequent attempts to achieve the same outcome have a higher failure rate. An attending physician needs to decide how the ultimate success may become compromised by letting a fellow start the procedure. A decision analysis is aimed to shed light on this issue.

METHODS

A formula is derived to calculate the point in time when to switch the instrument between an attending and fellow physician. This time point is determined by the ratio of benefit to the patient over benefit to the fellow, the difference in probability of achieving success by an attending versus a fellow, and the decline in probability of success during consecutive procedural attempts.

RESULTS

The attending should undertake the first attempts at doing the procedure, if the fellow is inexperienced and the difference in success rate between attending and fellow is still large, if the procedure is risky, and if the benefit of a successful outcome outweighs the benefit of a teaching experience to the fellow. Vice versa, fellows should take the lead, if they have become well trained and the difference in their procedural success rate compared with the attendings' has grown relatively small. The fellow should also be trusted to lead in all instances where the risk to the patient is small.

CONCLUSIONS

Such rules can serve as general guidance when to pass the endoscope to a fellow physician. Medical decision analysis is helpful to enlighten complex situations during training of fellows.

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.

Quality measures in gastrointestinal endoscopy: the current state

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to summarize the current state of endoscopic quality measurement and use of measures in enhancing the value of endoscopic services.

RECENT FINDINGS

Initially, quality measurement of endoscopic procedures was claims based or included small unit or practice-specific efforts. Now we have a mature national registry and large electronic medical or procedural records that are designed to yield valuable data relevant to quality measurement.

SUMMARY

With the advent of better measures, we are beginning to understand that initial process and surrogate outcome measures (adenoma detection rate) can be improved to provide a better reflection of endoscopic quality. Importantly, however, even measures currently in use relate to important patient outcomes such as missed colon cancers. At a federal level, older cumbersome pay-for-performance initiatives have been combined into a new overarching program named the quality payment program within the centers for medicare and medicaid services. This program is an additional step toward furthering the progress from volume-to-value-based reimbursement. The legislation mandating the movement toward outcomes-linked (value) reimbursement is the medicare access and children's health insurance program reauthorization act, which was passed with overwhelming bipartisan support and will not be walked back by alterations of the affordable care act. Increasing portions of medicare reimbursement (and likely commercial to follow) will be linked to quality metrics, so familiarity with the underlying process and rationale will be important for all proceduralists.

Quality indicators in digestive endoscopy: introduction to structure, process, and outcome common indicators

The general goal of the project wherein this paper is framed is the proposal of useful quality and safety procedures and indicators to facilitate quality improvement in digestive endoscopy units. This initial offspring sets forth procedures and indicators common to all digestive endoscopy procedures. First, a diagram of pre- and post-digestive endoscopy steps was developed. A group of health care quality and/or endoscopy experts under the auspices of the Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva (Spanish Society of Digestive Diseases) carried out a qualitative review of the literature regarding the search for quality indicators in endoscopic procedures. Then, a paired analysis was used for the selection of literature references and their subsequent review. Twenty indicators were identified, including seven for structure, eleven for process (five pre-procedure, three intra-procedure, three post-procedure), and two for outcome. Quality of evidence was analyzed for each indicator using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) classification.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a meta-analysis

The failure rate of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for biliary cannulation is approximately 6%–7% in cases of obstructive jaundice. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is the procedure of choice in such cases. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EGBD) is a novel technique that allows biliary drainage by echoendoscopy and fluoroscopy using a stent from the biliary tree to the gastrointestinal tract. Information in PubMed, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov and Cochrane review were analyzed to obtain studies comparing EGBD and PTBD. Six studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Technical (odds ratio (OR): 0.34; confidence interval (CI) 0.10–1.14; p=0.05) and clinical (OR: 1.48; CI 0.46–4.79; p=0.51) success rates were not statistically significant between the EGBD and PTBD groups. Mild adverse events were nonsignificantly different (OR: 0.36; CI 0.10–1.24; p=0.11) but not the moderate-to-severe adverse events (OR: 0.16; CI 0.08–0.32; p≤0.00001) and total adverse events (OR: 0.34; CI 0.20–0.59; p≤0.0001). EGBD is equally effective but safer than PTBD.

Acquiring and maintaining competency in gastrointestinal endoscopy

In recent years, an important transformation has taken place in the field of gastrointestinal endoscopy training. Two important movements have helped initiate this transformation: patient centered quality and competency based training. Patient centered quality in endoscopy became an important focus for colorectal cancer screening programs, as it was acknowledged that colonoscopy services played a central role in the outcomes of screening. This prompted the need to close the quality loop through the development of innovative endoscopist training and upskilling programs. As well, the importance of leadership skills and leadership training was highlighted as a key factor in effective quality improvement. Competency-based training depends on well-defined goals of training and on the regular documentation and review of the learner's progress. This is facilitated by objective assessment and performance enhancing feedback, enabled by measurement tools that can provide a quantitative or qualitative assessment and identify areas in need of further development. Simulators and scope imagers can aid the acquisition of technical skills, particularly in the novice phase. These important advances in our evolving concepts around endoscopy training have also raised many questions, highlighting important knowledge gaps which, we hope, will be addressed in coming years.