Simulator-based training method in gastrointestinal endoscopy training and currently available simulators

Navigating the learning landscape: Comprehensive training in third space endoscopy - training, techniques, and practical recommendations

Third space endoscopy (TSE), including ESD, POEM, or STER are advanced procedures requiring precise endoscopic control and tissue recognition. Despite its increasing adoption, evidence-based curricula, and standardized training protocols for TSE are lacking. This review explores training methods, cognitive skills, and technical proficiency requirements for endoscopists performing TSE, with a primary emphasis on POEM. Generally, it seems wise to recommend a step-up approach to TSE training, starting with ex-vivo models or POEM simulators; mechanical and virtual reality (VR) simulators are commonly used during early training. Preclinical training involving ex-vivo and live animal models is suggested to prepare trainees for safe and effective procedures. Studies suggest varying numbers of procedures for training, with approximately 20-40 cases needed before a first plateau is achieved in terms of complications and speed. The duration of on-patient clinical training varies depending on prior experience. Mentorship programs, workshops, and case discussions may facilitate dynamic knowledge transfer. In addition, adverse event management is a crucial aspect of any TSE training program. Existing evidence supports the use of preclinical models and emphasizes the importance of specialized training programs for TSE in alignment with our proposed step-up training approach. This review outlines practical recommendations for the theoretical knowledge and technical skills required before commencing TSE training, covering clinical understanding, diagnostic and outcome assessment, procedural requirements, and the role of mentorship programs.

Systematic review of subjective validation methods for computerized colonoscopy simulators

Introduction: In recent years, different approaches have been used to conduct a subjective assessment of colonoscopy simulators. The purpose of this paper is to review these different approaches, specifically the ones used for computerized simulators, as the first step for the design of a standard validation procedure for this type of simulators. Methods: A systematic review was conducted by searching papers after 2010 in PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and IEEE Xplore databases. Papers were screened and reviewed for procedures regarding the subjective validation of computerized simulators for traditional colonoscopy with an endoscope. Results: An initial search in the databases identified 2094 papers, of which 7 remained after exhaustive review and application of exclusion criteria. All studies used questionnaires for subjective validation, with "face" being the most common validity type tested, while "content" validity and "usability" were less prominent. Conclusions: A classification of subscales for testing face validity was derived from the studies. The Colonoscopy Simulator Realism Questionnaire (CSRQ) was selected as the guide to follow for the development of future questionnaires related to subjective validation. Mislabeling of the validity tested in the studies due to ambiguous interpretations of the validity types was a common occurrence observed in the reviewed studies.

Assemblage of a functional and versatile endoscopy trainer reusing medical waste: Step-by-step video tutorial

Watch a video of this article.

Exploring Endoscopic Competence in Gastroenterology Training: A Simulation-Based Comparative Analysis of GAGES, DOPS, and ACE Assessment Tools

Purpose

Accurate and convenient evaluation tools are essential to document endoscopic competence in Gastroenterology training programs. The Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS), Global Assessment of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Skills (GAGES), and Assessment of Endoscopic Competency (ACE) are widely used validated competency assessment tools for gastrointestinal endoscopy. However, studies comparing these 3 tools are lacking, leading to lack of standardization in this assessment. Through simulation, this study seeks to determine the most reliable, comprehensive, and user-friendly tool for standardizing endoscopy competency assessment.

Methods

A mixed-methods quantitative-qualitative approach was utilized with sequential deductive design. All nine trainees in a gastroenterology training program were assessed on endoscopic procedural competence using the Simbionix Gi-bronch-mentor high-fidelity simulator, with 2 faculty raters independently completing the 3 assessment forms of DOPS, GAGES, and ACE. Psychometric analysis was used to evaluate the tools' reliability. Additionally, faculty trainers participated in a focused group discussion (FGD) to investigate their experience in using the tools.

Results

For upper GI endoscopy, Cronbach's alpha values for internal consistency were 0.53, 0.8, and 0.87 for ACE, DOPS, and GAGES, respectively. Inter-rater reliability (IRR) scores were 0.79 (0.43-0.92) for ACE, 0.75 (-0.13-0.82) for DOPS, and 0.59 (-0.90-0.84) for GAGES. For colonoscopy, Cronbach's alpha values for internal consistency were 0.53, 0.82, and 0.85 for ACE, DOPS, and GAGES, respectively. IRR scores were 0.72 (0.39-0.96) for ACE, 0.78 (-0.12-0.86) for DOPS, and 0.53 (-0.91-0.78) for GAGES. The FGD yielded three key themes: the ideal tool should be scientifically sound, comprehensive, and user-friendly.

Conclusion

The DOPS tool performed favourably in both the qualitative assessment and psychometric evaluation to be considered the most balanced amongst the three assessment tools. We propose that the DOPS tool be used for endoscopic skill assessment in gastroenterology training programs. However, gastroenterology training programs need to match their learning outcomes with the available assessment tools to determine the most appropriate one in their context.

A Multicenter Survey of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy in 2019 at Korean Medical Institutions

Background/Aims

: This study aimed to review the indications, methods, cooperation, complications, and outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG).

Methods

: Questionnaires were sent to 200 hospitals, of which 62 returned their questionnaires, with a response rate of approximately 30%. Descriptive statistics were calculated to analyze the responses to the questionnaires.

Results

: In 2019, a total of 1,052 PEGs were performed in 1,017 patients at 62 hospitals. The main group who underwent PEG was older adult patients with brain disease, particularly stroke. Nutritional supply was an important purpose of the PEG procedure. "The pull method" was the most commonly used for initial PEG insertion. The complications related to PEG were mostly mild, with leakage being the most common. Patients who underwent PEG procedures were primarily educated regarding the post-procedure management and complications related to PEG. Preoperative meetings were skipped at >50% of the institutions. Regarding the cooperation between the nutrition support team (NST) and the physician performing PEG, few endoscopists answered that they cooperated with NST before and after PEG. Moreover, the rate of NST certification obtained by physicians performing PEG and the frequency of attendance at NST-related conferences were relatively low.

Conclusions

: This study shows a similar trend to that found in the previous PEG guidelines. However, it covers new aspects, including team-based work for PEG procedure, nutrition support, and education for patients and guardians. Therefore, each medical institution needs to select an appropriate method considering the medical environment and doctor's abilities.

Impact and assessment of training models in interventional endoscopic ultrasound

Interventional endoscopic ultrasound (IEUS) has gained significant popularity in recent years because of its diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. The proper training of endoscopists is critical to ensure safe and effective procedures. This review study aims to assess the impact of different training models on the competence of trainees performing IEUS. Eight studies that evaluated simulators for IEUS were identified in the medical literature. Various training models have been used, including the EASIE-R, Mumbai EUS, EUS Magic Box, EndoSim, Thai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy model, and an ex vivo porcine model (HiFi SAM). The trainees underwent traditional didactic lectures, hands-on training using simulators, and direct supervision by experienced endoscopists. The effectiveness of these models has been evaluated based on objective and subjective parameters such as technical proficiency, operative time, diagnostic success, and participant feedback. As expected, the majority of skills were improved after the training sessions concluded, although the risk of bias is high in the absence of external validation. It is difficult to determine the ideal simulator among the existing ones because of the wide variation between them in terms of costs, reusability, design, fidelity of anatomical structures and feedback, and types of procedures performed. There is a need for a standardized approach for the evaluation of IEUS simulators and the ways skills are acquired by trainees, as well as a clearer definition of the key personal attributes necessary for developing a physician into a skilled endoscopist capable of performing basic and advanced therapeutic EUS interventions.