Methods for certification in colonoscopy - a systematic review

Training in basic gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) Position Statement

This ESGE Position Statement provides structured and evidence-based guidance on the essential requirements and processes involved in training in basic gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures. The document outlines definitions; competencies required, and means to their assessment and maintenance; the structure and requirements of training programs; patient safety and medicolegal issues. 1:  ESGE and ESGENA define basic endoscopic procedures as those procedures that are commonly indicated, generally accessible, and expected to be mastered (technically and cognitively) by the end of any core training program in gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2:  ESGE and ESGENA consider the following as basic endoscopic procedures: diagnostic upper and lower GI endoscopy, as well as a limited range of interventions such as: tissue acquisition via cold biopsy forceps, polypectomy for lesions ≤ 10 mm, hemostasis techniques, enteral feeding tube placement, foreign body retrieval, dilation of simple esophageal strictures, and India ink tattooing of lesion location. 3:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that training in GI endoscopy should be subject to stringent formal requirements that ensure all ESGE key performance indicators (KPIs) are met. 4:  Training in basic endoscopic procedures is a complex process and includes the development and acquisition of cognitive, technical/motor, and integrative skills. Therefore, ESGE and ESGENA recommend the use of validated tools to track the development of skills and assess competence. 5:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend incorporating a multimodal approach to evaluating competence in basic GI endoscopic procedures, including procedural thresholds and the measurement and documentation of established ESGE KPIs. 7:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend the continuous monitoring of ESGE KPIs during GI endoscopy training to ensure the trainee's maintenance of competence. 9:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy training units fulfil the ESGE KPIs for endoscopy units and, furthermore, be capable of providing the dedicated personnel, infrastructure, and sufficient case volume required for successful training within a structured training program. 10:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that trainers in basic GI endoscopic procedures should be endoscopists with formal educational training in the teaching of endoscopy, which allows them to successfully and safely teach trainees.

Colonoscopy competence assessment tools: a systematic review of validity evidence

BACKGROUND

Assessment tools are essential for endoscopy training, being required to support feedback provision, optimize learner capabilities, and document competence. We aimed to evaluate the strength of validity evidence that supports the available colonoscopy direct observation assessment tools using the unified framework of validity.

METHODS

We systematically searched five databases for studies investigating colonoscopy direct observation assessment tools from inception until 8 April 2020. We extracted data outlining validity evidence (content, response process, internal structure, relations to other variables, and consequences) from the five sources and graded the degree of evidence, with a maximum score of 15. We assessed educational utility using an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education framework and methodological quality using the Medical Education Research Quality Instrument (MERSQI).

RESULTS

From 10 841 records, we identified 27 studies representing 13 assessment tools (10 adult, 2 pediatric, 1 both). All tools assessed technical skills, while 10 each assessed cognitive and integrative skills. Validity evidence scores ranged from 1-15. The Assessment of Competency in Endoscopy (ACE) tool, the Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) tool, and the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool (GiECAT) had the strongest validity evidence, with scores of 13, 15, and 14, respectively. Most tools were easy to use and interpret, and required minimal resources. MERSQI scores ranged from 9.5-11.5 (maximum score 14.5).

CONCLUSIONS

The ACE, DOPS, and GiECAT have strong validity evidence compared with other assessments. Future studies should identify barriers to widespread implementation and report on the use of these tools in credentialing examinations.

Self-assessment of Competence in Endoscopy: Challenges and Insights

BACKGROUND

Endoscopists use self-assessment to monitor the development and maintenance of their skills. The accuracy of these self-assessments, which reflects how closely one's own rating corresponds to an external rating, is unclear.

METHODS

In this narrative review, we critically examine the current literature on self-assessment in gastrointestinal endoscopy with the aim of informing training and practice and identifying opportunities to improve the methodological rigor of future studies.

RESULTS

In the seven included studies, the evidence regarding self-assessment accuracy was mixed. When stratified by experience level, however, novice endoscopists were least accurate in their self-assessments and tended to overestimate their performance. Studies examining the utility of video-based interventions using observation of expert benchmark performances show promise as a mechanism to improve self-assessment accuracy among novices.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of this review, we highlight problematic areas, identify opportunities to improve the methodological rigor of future studies on endoscopic self-assessment and outline potential avenues for further exploration.

Non-technical skills curriculum incorporating simulation-based training improves performance in colonoscopy among novice endoscopists: Randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Non-technical skills (NTS), involving cognitive, social and interpersonal skills that complement technical skills, are important for the completion of safe and efficient procedures. We investigated the impact of a simulation-based curriculum with dedicated NTS training on novice endoscopists' performance of clinical colonoscopies.

METHODS

A single-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted at a single center. Novice endoscopists were randomized to a control curriculum or a NTS curriculum. The control curriculum involved a didactic session, virtual reality (VR) simulator colonoscopy training, and integrated scenario practice using a VR simulator, a standardized patient, and endoscopy nurse. Feedback and training were provided by experienced endoscopists. The NTS curriculum group received similar training that included a small-group session on NTS, feedback targeting NTS, and access to a self-reflective NTS checklist. The primary outcome was performance during two clinical colonoscopies, assessed using the Joint Advisory Group Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (JAG DOPS) tool.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine participants completed the study. The NTS group (n = 21) had superior clinical performance during their first (P < 0.001) and second clinical colonoscopies (P < .0.001), compared to the control group (n = 18). The NTS group performed significantly better on the VR simulator (P < 0.05) and in the integrated scenario (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that dedicated NTS training led to improved performance of clinical colonoscopies among novices.

A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Endoscopy Competence Among Gastroenterology Trainees in the Era of the Next Accreditation System

PURPOSE

The Next Accreditation System requires training programs to demonstrate competence among trainees. Within gastroenterology (GI), there are limited data describing learning curves and structured assessment of competence in esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy. In this study, the authors aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of a centralized feedback system to assess endoscopy learning curves among GI trainees in EGD and colonoscopy.

METHOD

During academic year 2016-2017, the authors performed a prospective multicenter cohort study, inviting participants from multiple GI training programs. Trainee technical and cognitive skills were assessed using a validated competence assessment tool. An integrated, comprehensive data collection and reporting system was created to apply cumulative sum analysis to generate learning curves that were shared with program directors and trainees on a quarterly basis.

RESULTS

Out of 183 fellowships invited, 129 trainees from 12 GI fellowships participated, with an overall trainee participation rate of 72.1% (93/129); the highest participation level was among first-year trainees (90.9%; 80/88), and the lowest was among third-year trainees (51.2%; 27/53). In all, 1,385 EGDs and 1,293 colonoscopies were assessed. On aggregate learning curve analysis, third-year trainees achieved competence in overall technical and cognitive skills, while first- and second-year trainees demonstrated the need for ongoing supervision and training in the majority of technical and cognitive skills.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the feasibility of using a centralized feedback system for the evaluation and documentation of trainee performance in EGD and colonoscopy. Furthermore, third-year trainees achieved competence in both endoscopic procedures, validating the effectiveness of current training programs.

Can Pediatric Endoscopists Accurately Assess Their Clinical Competency? A Comparison Across Skill Levels

BACKGROUND

Assessment is critical to support pediatric endoscopy training. Although trainee engagement in assessment is encouraged, the use of self-assessment and its accuracy among pediatric endoscopists is not well described. We aimed to determine the self-assessment accuracy of novice, intermediate, and experienced pediatric endoscopists.

METHODS

Novice (performed <50 previous colonoscopies), intermediate (50-500), and experienced (>1000) pediatric endoscopists from 3 North American academic teaching hospitals each performed a clinical colonoscopy. Endoscopists were assessed in real-time by 2 experienced endoscopists using the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool for Pediatric Colonoscopy (GiECATKIDS). In addition, participants self-assessed their performance using the same instrument. Self-assessment accuracy between the externally assessed and self-assessed scores was evaluated using absolute difference scores, intraclass correlation coefficients, and Bland-Altman analyses.

RESULTS

Forty-seven endoscopists participated (21 novices, 16 intermediates, and 10 experienced). Overall, there was moderate agreement of externally assessed and self-assessed GiECATKIDS total scores with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.83). The absolute difference scores among the 3 groups were significantly different (P = 0.005), with experienced endoscopists demonstrating a more accurate self-assessment compared to novices (P = 0.003). Bland-Altman plots revealed that novice endoscopists' self-assessed scores tended to be higher than their externally assessed scores, indicating they overestimated their performance.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that endoscopic experience was positively associated with self-assessment accuracy among pediatric endoscopists. Novices were inaccurate in assessing their endoscopic competence and were prone to overestimation of their performances. Our findings suggest novices may benefit from targeted interventions aimed at improving their insight and self-awareness.

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.