Endoscopy training in the UK pre-COVID-19 environment: a multidisciplinary survey of endoscopy training and the experience of reciprocal feedback

Upper gastrointestinal training in the UK and Ireland: a Roux Group Study

INTRODUCTION

Surgical training programmes in the United Kingdom and Ireland (UK&I) are in a state of flux. This study aims to report the contemporary opinions of trainee and consultant surgeons on the current upper gastrointestinal (UGI) training model in the UK&I.

METHODS

A questionnaire was developed and distributed via national UGI societies. Questions pertained to demographics, current training evaluation, perceived requirements and availability.

RESULTS

A total of 241 responses were received with representation from all UK&I postgraduate training regions. The biggest discrepancies between rotation demand and national availability related to advanced/therapeutic endoscopy and robotic surgery, with 91.7% of respondents stating they would welcome greater geographical flexibility in training. The median suggested academic targets were 3-5 publications (trainee vs consultant <3 vs 3-5, p<0.001); <3 presentations (<3 vs 3-5, p=0.002); and 3-5 audits/quality improvement projects (<3 vs 3-5, p<0.001). Current operative requirements were considered achievable (87.6%) but inadequate for day one consultant practice (74.7%). Reassuringly, 76.3% deemed there was role for on-the-job operative training following consultant appointment. Proficiency in diagnostic endoscopy was considered a minimum requirement for Certificate of Completion of Training (CCT) yet the majority regarded therapeutic endoscopy competency as non-essential. The median numbers of index UGI operations suggested were comparable with the current curriculum requirements. Post-CCT fellowships were not considered necessary; however, the majority (73.6%) recognised their advantage.

CONCLUSIONS

Current CCT requirements are largely consistent with the opinions of the UGI community. Areas for improvement include flexibility in geographical working and increasing national provisions for high-quality endoscopy training.

UK endoscopy trainer survey: perspectives on current endoscopy training delivery, experience, barriers and opportunities

Objective

UK endoscopy training is delivered by trainers possessing well developed endoscopy and teaching skills to help learners perform high-quality endoscopy. Train The Trainer (TTT) courses are effective, but additional trainer support is variable with little formal quality assurance. We performed a survey to map UK endoscopy training, assess trainer perspectives on training delivery and identify factors that would enhance training.

Design/Method

An online survey was designed by trainer representatives, in collaboration with the JAG training committee, and collected responses from trainers registered on JAG endoscopy training system e-portfolio from April to June 2022.

Results

There were 1024 responses from all trainer disciplines, with 813 (79%) completing TTT courses and 584 (57%) having job planned dedicated training lists (DTLs). Clinical endoscopists most frequently had job-planned DTLs (71%), and DTLs occurring at least weekly (58%). 293 (29%) respondents participated as course faculty. Trainers reported high levels of pre-procedure preparation, effective dialogue and frequent feedback. The DOPS forms were 'always/often' completed by 81% of clinical endoscopists, 73% of gastroenterologist and 58% of surgeons. 435 (42%) trainers never had peer feedback. Responses suggested training could improve by protecting training time, attending courses, participating as faculty and receiving feedback from experienced trainers.

Conclusion

This survey demonstrates substantial proportions of highly motivated UK trainers who value time spent teaching and learning how to teach. Skills taught on the TTT courses are often actively used in everyday training. Improved trainer course access, protected training time and formal use of existing feedback tools by peers were highlighted as measures that could support trainers' development.

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.

Endoscopy training in Australia during COVID-19: Efficacy and knowledge assessment of gastroenterology and general surgery trainees

Background and Aim

During COVID-19, restrictions to elective endoscopy were introduced worldwide. A reduction in procedures may impact trainees' endoscopy learning. This study aims to assess Australian advanced gastroenterology and general surgery trainees' self-perceived efficacy and knowledge in endoscopy during the pandemic.

Methods

All Australian gastroenterology and general surgery trainees in their last 2 years of accredited training were invited to participate through email (2020-2021 and 2021-2022 training cycles). The primary outcome was to assess trainees' self-efficacy and knowledge regarding gastrointestinal endoscopy. Secondary outcomes included subgroup analysis between gastroenterology and general surgery trainees. Self-perceived efficacy was assessed with Likert-scale questions on 20 endoscopy procedures and knowledge was assessed through 21 endoscopy-related multiple choice questions.

Results

Eighty-one trainees responded to a self-efficacy questionnaire and 77 responded to the knowledge questionnaire. Over 90% of the trainees were confident or extremely confident in diagnostic endoscopy, but only half demonstrated similar efficacy for therapeutic endoscopy. The efficacy for basic endoscopy procedures was higher for gastroenterology trainees (64.0% vs 51.1%, P < 0.001). Last-year trainee achievement of conjoint committee requirements for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was achieved in 95.8% of gastroenterology trainees versus 22.2% of surgical trainees (P < 0.001). The median score on the knowledge questionnaire was also higher for the gastroenterology subset (90.5% vs 71.4%, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

During COVID-19, endoscopy trainees' self-efficacy in endoscopic diagnostic procedures was achieved for most trainees. The differences in self-perceived efficacy and knowledge between gastroenterology and surgical trainees may be reflective of the different opportunities for learning between the two groups.

Hospital compound-level endoscopy training quality performance: scoping the spectrum

Background and study aims  This study aimed to assess the quality of endoscopy training in a UK Statutory Educational Body compared with Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Training standards (JETS). Methods  A total of 28,298 training procedures recorded by 211 consecutive cross-specialty trainee endoscopists registered with JETS in 18 hospitals during 2019 were analyzed. Data included trainer and trainee numbers, training list frequency, procedures, direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) completion, and key performance indicators. Results  Annual median training procedures per hospital were 1395 (interquartile range (IQR) 465-2365). Median trainers and trainees per unit were 11 (6-18) and 12 (7-16), respectively, (ratio 0.8 [0.7-1.3]). Annual training list frequency per trainee was 13 (10-17), 35.0 % short of Joint Advisory Group (JAG) standard (n = 20, P = 0.001, effect size -0.56). Median points per adjusted training list were 11 (5-18). Median DOPS per trainee and trainer were three (1-6) and four (1-7) respectively; completing 0.2 DOPS (0.1-0.4) per list and amounting to six (2-12) per 200 procedures: fewer than half of the JAG standard (20 per 200) (P < 0.001, -0.61). Esophagogastroduodenoscopy median KPI: J maneuver 94 % (90-96), D2 intubation 93 % (91-96); Colonoscopy KPI: cecal intubation 82 % (72-90), polyp detection rate 25 % (18-34). Compound hospital score ranged from nine to 26 (median 17 [14-20]). Conclusions  Important performance disparity emerged with three-fold variation in compound hospital training quality and most units underperforming compared with JAG standards. Trainees and training program directors should be aware of such metrics to improve quality endoscopy educational programs and consider formal adjuncts to optimize training.

JAG consensus statements for training and certification in oesophagogastroduodenoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Training and quality assurance in oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) is important to ensure competent practice. A national evidence-based review was undertaken to update and develop standards and recommendations for OGD training and certification.

METHODS

Under the oversight of the Joint Advisory Group (JAG), a modified Delphi process was conducted with stakeholder representation from British Society of Gastroenterology, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, trainees and trainers. Recommendations on OGD training and certification were formulated following literature review and appraised using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. These were subjected to electronic voting to achieve consensus. Accepted statements were incorporated into the updated certification pathway.

RESULTS

In total, 32 recommendation statements were generated for the following domains: definition of competence (4 statements), acquisition of competence (12 statements), assessment of competence (10 statements) and post-certification support (6 statements). The consensus process led to following certification criteria: (1) performing ≥250 hands-on procedures; (2) attending a JAG-accredited basic skills course; (3) attainment of relevant minimal performance standards defined by British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland, (4) achieving physically unassisted D2 intubation and J-manoeuvre in ≥95% of recent procedures, (5) satisfactory performance in formative and summative direct observation of procedural skills assessments.

CONCLUSION

The JAG standards for diagnostic OGD have been updated following evidence-based consensus. These standards are intended to support training, improve competency assessment to uphold standards of practice and provide support to the newly-independent practitioner.

UK-wide study of the opinions of gastroenterology trainees: COVID-19, Shape of Training and the future workforce

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted training. Gastroenterology higher specialty training is soon to be reduced from 5 years to 4. The British Society of Gastroenterology Trainees Section biennial survey aims to delineate the impact of COVID-19 on training and the opinions on changes to training.

METHODS

An electronic survey allowing for anonymised responses at the point of completion was distributed to all gastroenterology trainees from September to November 2020.

RESULTS

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, 71.0% of the respondents stated that more than 50% of their clinical time was mostly within general internal medicine. Trainees reported a significant impact on all aspects of their gastroenterology training due to lost training opportunities and increasing service commitments. During the first wave, 88.5% of the respondents reported no access to endoscopy training lists. Since this time, 66.2% of the respondents stated that their endoscopy training lists had restarted. This has resulted in fewer respondents achieving endoscopy accreditation. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused 42.2% of the respondents to consider extending their training to obtain the skills required to complete training. Furthermore, 10.0% of the respondents reported concerns of a delay to completion of training. The majority of respondents (84.2%) reported that they would not feel ready to be a consultant after 4 years of training.

CONCLUSIONS

Reductions in all aspects of gastroenterology training were reported. This is mirrored in anticipated concerns about completion of training in a shorter training programme as proposed in the new curriculum. Work is now required to ensure training is restored following the pandemic.