[Role of Virtual Reality in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Training and Teaching]

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscope is one of the instruments used extensively in the diagnosis and treatment of digestive tract disorders. China is confronted with a great demand for endoscopists working in grassroots healthcare facilities. Furthermore, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are becoming the prevailing methods of endoscopic treatment of digestive diseases. Therefore, there is a growing demand for senior endoscopists. Currently, an important focus of GI endoscopy training is the acceleration of standardized training for endoscopists working in grassroots health facilities and advanced training for senior endoscopists. Simulation devices based on virtual reality technology exhibit strengths in objectivity, authenticity, and an immersive experience. These devices show advantages in the training method, the number of participants, and assessment over traditional training programs for GI endoscopy. Their application provides a new approach to the training and teaching of GI endoscopy. Herein, we summarized the explorations and practices of using virtual reality technology in the training and teaching of GI endoscopy, analyzed its application status in China, and discussed its prospects for future application.

Curriculum for diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound training in Europe: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has recognized the need to formalize and enhance training in diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). This manuscript represents the outcome of a formal Delphi process resulting in an official Position Statement of the ESGE and provides a framework to develop and maintain skills in diagnostic EUS. This curriculum is set out in terms of the prerequisites prior to training; the recommended steps of training to a defined syllabus; the quality of training; and how competence should be defined and evidenced before independent practice. 1:  Trainees should have achieved competence in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy before training in diagnostic EUS. 2:  The development of diagnostic EUS skills by methods that do not involve patients is advisable, but not mandatory, prior to commencing formal training in diagnostic EUS. 3:  A trainee's principal trainer should be performing adequate volumes of diagnostic EUSs to demonstrate maintenance of their own competence. 4:  Training centers for diagnostic EUS should offer expertise, as well as a high volume of procedures per year, to ensure an optimal level of quality for training. Under these conditions, training centers should be able to provide trainees with a sufficient wealth of experience in diagnostic EUS for at least 12 months. 5:  Trainees should engage in formal training and supplement this with a range of learning resources for diagnostic EUS, including EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy (FNA/FNB). 6:  EUS training should follow a structured syllabus to guide the learning program. 7:  A minimum procedure volume should be offered to trainees during diagnostic EUS training to ensure that they have the opportunity to achieve competence in the technique. To evaluate competence in diagnostic EUS, trainees should have completed a minimum of 250 supervised EUS procedures: 80 for luminal tumors, 20 for subepithelial lesions, and 150 for pancreaticobiliary lesions. At least 75 EUS-FNA/FNBs should be performed, including mostly pancreaticobiliary lesions. 8:  Competence assessment in diagnostic EUS should take into consideration not only technical skills, but also cognitive and integrative skills. A reliable valid assessment tool should be used regularly during diagnostic EUS training to track the acquisition of competence and to support trainee feedback. 9:  A period of supervised practice should follow the start of independent activity. Supervision can be delivered either on site if other colleagues are already practicing EUS or by maintaining contacts with the training center and/or other EUS experts. 10:  Key performance measures including the annual number of procedures, frequency of obtaining a diagnostic sample during EUS-FNA/FNB, and adverse events should be recorded within an electronic documentation system and evaluated.

Sex differences impact ergonomic endoscopic training for gastroenterology fellows

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic-related injuries (ERIs) for gastroenterologists are common and can impact longevity of an endoscopic career. This study examines sex differences in the prevalence of ERIs and ergonomic training during gastroenterology fellowship.

METHODS

A 56-item anonymous survey was sent to 709 general and advanced endoscopy gastroenterology fellows at 73 U.S. training programs between May and June 2022. Demographic information was collected along with questions related to endoscopic environment, ergonomic instruction, technique, equipment availability, and ergonomic knowledge. Responses of female and male gastroenterology fellows were compared using χ2 and Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

Of the 236 respondents (response rate, 33.9%), 113 (44.5%) were women and 123 (52.1%) were men. Female fellows reported on average smaller hand sizes and shorter heights. More female fellows reported endoscopic equipment was not ergonomically optimized for their use. Additionally, more female fellows voiced preference for same-gender teachers and access to dial extenders and well-fitting lead aprons. High rates of postendoscopy pain were reported by both sexes, with significantly more women experiencing neck and shoulder pain. Trainees of both sexes demonstrated poor ergonomic awareness with an average score of 68% on a 5-point knowledge-based assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical differences exist between male and female trainees, and current endoscopic equipment may not be optimized for smaller hand sizes. This study highlights the urgent need for formal ergonomic training for trainees and trainers with consideration of stature and hand size to enhance safety, comfort, and equity in the training and practice of endoscopy.

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.

Evidence-Based Cognitive Endoscopy Simulators: Do They Exist? A Systematic Search and Evaluation of Existing Platforms

BACKGROUND

The development of guidelines by gastroenterology societies increasingly stresses evidence-based endoscopic practice.

AIMS

We performed a systematic assessment to determine whether endoscopic video teaching platforms incorporate evidence-based educational strategies and methods in order to disseminate guideline-based endoscopic management strategies.

METHODS

Platforms with a video component were systematically identified using the Google search engine, Apple and Android application stores, and searching four major gastroenterology society websites and three known platforms, to identify all relevant platforms. Two video samples from each teaching platform were reviewed independently by two authors and assessed for use of a priori defined principles of evidence-based medicine, as determined by consensus agreement and for the use of simulation.

RESULTS

Fourteen platforms were included in the final analysis, and two videos from each were analyzed. One of the 14 platforms used simulation and incorporated evidence-based medicine principles consistently. Nine of the 14 platforms were not transparent in regard to citation. None of the platforms consistently cited the certainty of evidence or explained how evidence was selected.

CONCLUSIONS

Education of guideline-based endoscopic management strategies using principles of evidence-based medicine is under-utilized in endoscopic videos. In addition, the use of cognitive simulation is absent in this arena. There is a paucity of evidence-based cognitive endoscopy simulators designed for fellows that incorporate systematic evaluation, and efforts should be made to create this platform.

Current and future implications of COVID-19 on gastroenterology training and clinical practice

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected almost every country on the globe, affecting 185 countries with more than 2.6 million cases and 182,000 deaths as of April 22, 2020. The United States (US) has seen an exponential surge in the COVID-19 patients and has become the epicentre with more than 845,000 confirmed cases and 46,000 deaths. The governments and healthcare providers all over the world are racing with time to reduce the rate of increase in active cases by social distancing to flatten the curve of this pandemic. Practicing gastroenterologists are facing multiple challenges in the safe practice of medicine because of patient's inability to visit physicians' offices, endoscopy centers and the threat of potential virus spread through gastrointestinal secretions by endoscopies in emergent cases. The gastroenterological associations from Europe and North America have made position statements to guide gastroenterologists to navigate through the clinical practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Gastroenterology fellows are on the frontlines during the COVID-19 pandemic, experiencing personal, physical and economic stresses. They had to balance the programmatic changes to meet the demands of the patient care with the additional pressure to meet training requirements. Given the imperatives for social and physical distancing, training programmes have to implement innovative educational methods to substitute traditional teaching. Healthcare organisations must synchronise institutional workforce needs with trainee safety, education and well-being. In this perspective, we have discussed the challenges that can be anticipated and implementing strategies to support fellows during the times of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Feasibility of needlescopic surgery for colorectal cancer: safety and learning curve for Japanese Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System-unqualified young surgeons

BACKGROUND

Needlescopic surgery (NS) is a minimally invasive technique for colorectal cancer. NS may be easier to perform than other minimally invasive surgery such as single-incision laparoscopic surgery and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery because the port setting is the same while the shafts are thinner than in conventional laparoscopic surgery. We evaluated the capability of introducing this surgery for sigmoid and rectosigmoid colon cancer by assessing the learning curve in Japanese Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System (JESSQS)-unqualified surgeons.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 112 cases of sigmoidectomy and anterior resection were performed by NS from October 2011 to December 2015 in our institution. Surgical outcomes including operation time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, perioperative complications, and overall survival were compared between JESSQS-qualified surgeons (Group A) and JESSQS-unqualified surgeons (Group B). The learning curve for NS was established using the average operation times in JESSQS-unqualified surgeons.

RESULTS

Groups A and B comprised of 41 and 71 patients, respectively. Ninety patients underwent sigmoidectomy and 22 patients underwent anterior resection. No conversion to open surgery occurred. The operation time was significantly shorter in Group A than B (P = 0.0080). There were no significant differences in blood loss, the postoperative hospital stay, perioperative complications, or overall survival between the two groups. These variables were similar even when NS was considered relatively difficult, as in patients with obesity (body mass index of ≥ 25 kg/m²), bulky tumors (tumor size of ≥ 50 mm), and stage III/IV cancer. The average operation time in JESSQS-unqualified young surgeons was significantly shorter in the ninth and tenth cases than in the first and second cases of NS (P = 0.0282).

CONCLUSIONS

NS for sigmoid and rectosigmoid colon cancer was performed safely by both JESSQS-qualified surgeons and JESSQS-unqualified surgeons. Even JESSQS-unqualified young surgeons might be able to quickly learn NS techniques.

Protocol for a randomised trial evaluating the effect of applying gamification to simulation-based endoscopy training

BACKGROUND

Simulation-based training (SBT) provides a safe environment and effective means to enhance skills development. Simulation-based curricula have been developed for a number of procedures, including gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gamification, which is the application of game-design principles to non-game contexts, is an instructional strategy with potential to enhance learning. No studies have investigated the effects of a comprehensive gamification curriculum on the acquisition of endoscopic skills among novice endoscopists.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Thirty-six novice endoscopists will be randomised to one of two endoscopy SBT curricula: (1) the Conventional Curriculum Group, in which participants will receive 6 hours of one-on-one simulation training augmented with expert feedback and interlaced with 4 hours of small group teaching on the theory of colonoscopy or (2) the Gamified Curriculum Group, in which participants will receive the same curriculum with integration of the following game-design elements: a leaderboard summarising participants' performance, game narrative, achievement badges and rewards for top performance. In line with a progressive learning approach, simulation training for participants will progress from low to high complexity simulators, starting with a bench-top model and then moving to the EndoVR virtual reality simulator. Performance will be assessed at three points: pretraining, immediately post-training and 4-6 weeks after training. Assessments will take place on the simulator at all three time points and transfer of skills will be assessed during two clinical colonoscopies 4-6 weeks post-training. Mixed factorial ANOVAs will be used to determine if there is a performance difference between the two groups during simulated and clinical assessments.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained at St. Michael's Hospital. Results of this trial will be submitted for presentation at academic meetings and for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03176251.

The SAGES flexible endoscopy course for fellows: a worthwhile investment in furthering surgical endoscopy

BACKGROUND

The SAGES flexible endoscopy course for minimally invasive surgery (MIS) fellows improves confidence and skills in performing gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. This study evaluated the long-term retention of these confidence levels and investigated how fellows changed practices within their fellowships due to the course.

METHODS

Participating MIS fellows completed surveys 6 months after the course. Respondents rated their confidence to independently perform 16 endoscopic procedures (1 = not at all; 5 = very), barriers to use of endoscopy, and current uses of endoscopy. Respondents also noted participation in additional skills courses and status of fundamentals of endoscopic surgery (FES) certification. Comparisons of responses from the immediate post-course survey to the 6-month follow-up survey were examined. McNemar and paired t tests were used for analyses.

RESULTS

23 of 57 (40%) course participants returned to the 6-month survey. No major barriers to endoscopy use were identified. Fellows reported less competition with GI providers as a barrier to practice compared to their original post-course expectations (50% vs. 86%, p < 0.01). In addition, confidence was maintained in performing the majority of the 16 endoscopic procedures, although fellows reported significant decreases in confidence in independently performing snare polypectomy (- 26%; p < 0.05), control of variceal bleeding (- 39%; p < 0.05), colonic stenting (- 48%; p < 0.01), BARRX (- 40%; p < 0.05), and TIF (- 31%; p < 0.05). Fewer fellows used the GI suite to manage surgical problems than was anticipated post course (26% vs. 74%, p < 0.01). Fellows who passed FES noted no significant loss of independence, changes in use, or barriers to use. 18% made additional partnerships with industry after the course. 41% stated flexible endoscopy has influenced their post-fellowship job choice.

CONCLUSIONS

The SAGES flexible endoscopy course for MIS fellows results in long-term practice changes with participating fellows maintaining confidence to perform the majority of taught endoscopic procedures 6 months later. Additionally, fellows experienced no major barriers to implementing endoscopy into practice.

Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Endoscopy has traditionally been taught with novices practicing on real patients under the supervision of experienced endoscopists. Recently, the growing awareness of the need for patient safety has brought simulation training to the forefront. Simulation training can provide trainees with the chance to practice their skills in a learner-centred, risk-free environment. It is important to ensure that skills gained through simulation positively transfer to the clinical environment. This updated review was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) simulation training in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether virtual reality simulation training can supplement and/or replace early conventional endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) in diagnostic oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy, and/or sigmoidoscopy for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following health professions, educational, and computer databases until 12 July 2017: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL, AMED, ERIC, Education Full Text, CBCA Education, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Abstracts in New Technology and Engineering, Computer and Information Systems Abstracts, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. We also searched the grey literature until November 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials comparing VR endoscopy simulation training versus any other method of endoscopy training with outcomes measured on humans in the clinical setting, including conventional patient-based training, training using another form of endoscopy simulation, or no training. We also included trials comparing two different methods of VR training.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of trials, and extracted data on the trial characteristics and outcomes. We pooled data for meta-analysis where participant groups were similar, studies assessed the same intervention and comparator, and had similar definitions of outcome measures. We calculated risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We calculated mean difference (MD) and standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes when studies reported the same or different outcome measures, respectively. We used GRADE to rate the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 trials (421 participants; 3817 endoscopic procedures). We judged three trials as at low risk of bias. Ten trials compared VR training with no training, five trials with conventional endoscopy training, one trial with another form of endoscopy simulation training, and two trials compared two different methods of VR training. Due to substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity across our four comparisons, we did not perform a meta-analysis for several outcomes. We rated the quality of evidence as moderate, low, or very low due to risk of bias, imprecision, and heterogeneity.Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training: There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect on composite score of competency (MD 3.10, 95% CI -0.16 to 6.36; 1 trial, 24 procedures; low-quality evidence). Composite score of competency was based on 5-point Likert scales assessing seven domains: atraumatic technique, colonoscope advancement, use of instrument controls, flow of procedure, use of assistants, knowledge of specific procedure, and overall performance. Scoring range was from 7 to 35, a higher score representing a higher level of competence. Virtual reality training compared to no training likely provides participants with some benefit, as measured by independent procedure completion (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.26; 6 trials, 815 procedures; moderate-quality evidence). We evaluated overall rating of performance (MD 0.45, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.75; 1 trial, 18 procedures), visualisation of mucosa (MD 0.60, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.00; 1 trial, 55 procedures), performance time (MD -0.20 minutes, 95% CI -0.71 to 0.30; 2 trials, 29 procedures), and patient discomfort (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.68 to 0.35; 2 trials, 145 procedures), all with very low-quality evidence. No trials reported procedure-related complications or critical flaws (e.g. bleeding, luminal perforation) (3 trials, 550 procedures; moderate-quality evidence).Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient-based training: One trial reported composite score of competency but did not provide sufficient data for quantitative analysis. Virtual reality training compared to conventional patient-based training resulted in fewer independent procedure completions (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74; 2 trials, 174 procedures; low-quality evidence). We evaluated performance time (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.55 to 0.80; 2 trials, 34 procedures), overall rating of performance (MD -0.90, 95% CI -4.40 to 2.60; 1 trial, 16 procedures), and visualisation of mucosa (MD 0.0, 95% CI -6.02 to 6.02; 1 trial, 18 procedures), all with very low-quality evidence. Virtual reality training in combination with conventional training appears to be advantageous over VR training alone. No trials reported any procedure-related complications or critical flaws (3 trials, 72 procedures; very low-quality evidence).Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus another form of endoscopy simulation: Based on one study, there were no differences between groups with respect to composite score of competency, performance time, and visualisation of mucosa. Virtual reality training in combination with another form of endoscopy simulation training did not appear to confer any benefit compared to VR training alone.Two methods of virtual reality training: Based on one study, a structured VR simulation-based training curriculum compared to self regulated learning on a VR simulator appears to provide benefit with respect to a composite score evaluating competency. Based on another study, a progressive-learning curriculum that sequentially increases task difficulty provides benefit with respect to a composite score of competency over the structured VR training curriculum.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

VR simulation-based training can be used to supplement early conventional endoscopy training for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience. However, we found insufficient evidence to advise for or against the use of VR simulation-based training as a replacement for early conventional endoscopy training. The quality of the current evidence was low due to inadequate randomisation, allocation concealment, and/or blinding of outcome assessment in several trials. Further trials are needed that are at low risk of bias, utilise outcome measures with strong evidence of validity and reliability, and examine the optimal nature and duration of training.

Organization of future training in bariatric gastroenterology

A world-wide rise in the prevalence of obesity continues. This rise increases the occurrence of, risks of, and costs of treating obesity-related medical conditions. Diet and activity programs are largely inadequate for the long-term treatment of medically-complicated obesity. Physicians who deliver gastrointestinal care after completing traditional training programs, including gastroenterologists and general surgeons, are not uniformly trained in or familiar with available bariatric care. It is certain that gastrointestinal physicians will incorporate new endoscopic methods into their practice for the treatment of individuals with medically-complicated obesity, although the long-term impact of these endoscopic techniques remains under investigation. It is presently unclear whether gastrointestinal physicians will be able to provide or coordinate important allied services in bariatric surgery, endocrinology, nutrition, psychological evaluation and support, and social work. Obtaining longitudinal results examining the effectiveness of this ad hoc approach will likely be difficult, based on prior experience with other endoscopic measures, such as the adenoma detection rates from screening colonoscopy. As a long-term approach, development of a specific curriculum incorporating one year of subspecialty training in bariatrics to the present training of gastrointestinal fellows needs to be reconsidered. This approach should be facilitated by gastrointestinal trainees’ prior residency training in subspecialties that provide care for individuals with medical complications of obesity, including endocrinology, cardiology, nephrology, and neurology. Such training could incorporate additional rotations with collaborating providers in bariatric surgery, nutrition, and psychiatry. Since such training would be provided in accredited programs, longitudinal studies could be developed to examine the potential impact on accepted measures of care, such as complication rates, outcomes, and costs, in individuals with medically-complicated obesity.

Ex vivo and simulator models teaching therapeutic ERCP and EUS: description of SOBED's first course

Teaching models in endoscopy are important tools to minimize risks derived from endoscopic procedures, taking into account that therapeutic endoscopy, also known as surgical endoscopy, has greatly developed during the last decade. This results from the fact that minimally invasive procedures present relevant contributions and promote more comfort to patients. In this context, ex vivo teaching models and virtual simulators are important tools to the safe acquisition of abilities. In this article, the Brazilian Society of Digestive Endoscopy presents and describes its first course of therapeutic ERCP and EUS in models of laboratory teaching.

Training for advanced endoscopic procedures

Advanced endoscopy has evolved from diagnostic ERCP to an ever-increasing array of therapeutic procedures including EUS with FNA, ablative therapies, deep enteroscopy, luminal stenting, endoscopic suturing and endoscopic mucosal resection among others. As these procedures have become increasingly more complex, the risk of potential complications has also risen. Training in advanced endoscopy involves more than obtaining a minimum number of therapeutic procedures. The means of assessing a trainee's competence level and ability to practice independently continues to be a matter of debate. The use of quality indicators to measure performance levels may be beneficial as more advanced techniques and procedures become available.

Preoperative indicators of failure of en bloc resection or perforation in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: implications for lesion stratification by technical difficulties during stepwise training

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The technical difficulties inherent in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal neoplasms may result in the failure of en bloc resection or perforation. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the predictors of en bloc resection failure or perforation by using preoperatively available factors.

METHODS

Between September 2002 and March 2013, 716 colorectal ESDs in 673 consecutive patients were performed at a tertiary cancer center. Patient characteristics, tumor location, tumor type, colonoscopy-related factors, and endoscopist experience were assessed based on a prospectively recorded institutional ESD database. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of failure of en bloc resection or perforations, with subgroup analyses of ESDs performed by endoscopists less experienced in colorectal ESD (<40 cases) and for colonic lesions only.

RESULTS

On multivariate analysis, independent predictors of failure of en bloc resection or perforations were the presence of fold convergence (odds ratio [OR] 4.4; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.9-9.9), protruding type (OR 3.6; 95% CI, 1.8-7.1), poor endoscope operability (OR 3.5; 95% CI, 1.8-6.9), right-sided colonic lesions (OR 3.0; 95% CI, 1.5-6.3 vs rectal lesions), left-sided colonic lesions (OR 3.2; 95% CI, 1.7-6.3, vs rectal lesions), the presence of an underlying semilunar fold (OR 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3-3.6), and a less-experienced endoscopist (OR 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3-3.6). Among less-experienced endoscopists, colonic lesions were independent predictors (right-sided colonic lesions 8.1; 95% CI, 2.9-25.1; left-sided colonic lesions 8.1; 95% CI, 2.5-28.3 vs rectal lesions). For colonic lesions, the presence of fold convergence (OR 3.7; 95% CI, 1.6-8.6), poor endoscope operability (OR 3.6; 95% CI, 1.8-7.2), a less-experienced endoscopist (OR 3.0; 95% CI, 1.7-1.8), and the presence of an underlying semilunar fold (OR 2.7; 95% CI, 1.5-4.7) were identified predictors.

CONCLUSION

This study successfully identified predictors of en bloc resection failure or perforation. Understanding these indicators could help to accurately stratify lesions according to technical difficulty and to appropriately select endoscopists.

Endoscopic capacity in West Africa

BACKGROUND

Levels of endoscopic demand and capacity in West Africa are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

This paper aims to: 1. describe the current labor and endoscopic capacity, 2. quantify the impact of a mixed-methods endoscopy course on healthcare professionals in West Africa, and 3. quantify the types of diagnoses encountered.

METHODS

In a three-day course, healthcare professionals were surveyed on endoscopic resources and capacity and were taught through active observation of live cases, case discussion, simulator experience and didactics. Before and after didactics, multiple-choice exams as well as questionnaires were administered to assess for course efficacy. Also, a case series of 23 patients needing upper GI endoscopy was done.

RESULTS

In surveying physicians, less than half had resources to perform an EGD and none could perform an ERCP, while waiting time for emergency endoscopy in urban populations was at least one day. In assessing improvement in medical knowledge among participants after didactics, objective data paired with subjective responses was more useful than either alone. Of 23 patients who received endoscopy, 7 required endoscopic intervention with 6 having gastric or esophageal varices. Currently the endoscopic capacity in West Africa is not sufficient. A formal GI course with simulation and didactics improves gastrointestinal knowledge amongst participants.

How to establish endoscopic submucosal dissection in Western countries

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been invented in Japan to provide resection for cure of early cancer in the gastrointestinal tract. Professional level of ESD requires excellent staging of early neoplasias with image enhanced endoscopy (IEE) to make correct indications for ESD, and high skills in endoscopic electrosurgical dissection. In Japan, endodiagnostic and endosurgical excellence spread through personal tutoring of skilled endoscopists by the inventors and experts in IEE and ESD. To translocate this expertise to other continents must overcome two fundamental obstacles: (1) inadequate expectations as to the complexity of IEE and ESD; and (2) lack of suitable lesions and master-mentors for ESD trainees. Leading endoscopic mucosal resection-proficient endoscopists must pioneer themselves through the long learning curve to proficient ESD experts. Major referral centers for ESD must arise in Western countries on comparable professional level as in Japan. In the second stage, the upcoming Western experts must commit themselves to teach skilled endoscopists from other referral centers, in order to spread ESD in Western countries. Respect for patients with early gastrointestinal cancer asks for best efforts to learn endoscopic categorization of early neoplasias and skills for ESD based on sustained cooperation with the masters in Japan. The strategy is discussed here.

Learning models for endoscopic ultrasonography in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has become a useful diagnostic and therapeutic modality in gastrointestinal endoscopy. However, EUS requires additional training since it requires simultaneous endoscopic manipulation and ultrasonographic interpretation. Obtaining adequate EUS training can be challenging since EUS is highly operator-dependent and training on actual patients can be associated with an increased risk of complications including inaccurate diagnosis. Therefore, several models have been developed to help facilitate training of EUS. The models currently available for EUS training include computer-based simulators, phantoms, ex vivo models, and live animal models. Although each model has its own merits and limitations, the value of these different models is rather complementary than competitive. However, there is a lack of objective data regarding the efficacy of each model with recommendations on the use of various training models based on expert opinion only. Therefore, objective studies evaluating the efficacy of various EUS training models on technical and clinical outcomes are still needed.

Non-physician endoscopists: A systematic review

AIM: To examine the available evidence on safety, competency and cost-effectiveness of nursing staff providing gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy services.

METHODS: The literature was searched for publications reporting nurse endoscopy using several databases and specific search terms. Studies were screened against eligibility criteria and for relevance. Initial searches yielded 74 eligible and relevant articles; 26 of these studies were primary research articles using original datasets relating to the ability of non-physician endoscopists. These publications included a total of 28883 procedures performed by non-physician endoscopists.

RESULTS: The number of publications in the field of non-specialist gastrointestinal endoscopy reached a peak between 1999 and 2001 and has decreased thereafter. 17/26 studies related to flexible sigmoidoscopies, 5 to upper GI endoscopy and 6 to colonoscopy. All studies were from metropolitan centres with nurses working under strict supervision and guidance by specialist gastroenterologists. Geographic distribution of publications showed the majority of research was conducted in the United States (43%), the United Kingdom (39%) and the Netherlands (7%). Most studies conclude that after appropriate training nurse endoscopists safely perform procedures. However, in relation to endoscopic competency, safety or patient satisfaction, all studies had major methodological limitations. Patients were often not randomized (21/26 studies) and not appropriately controlled. In relation to cost-efficiency, nurse endoscopists were less cost-effective per procedure at year 1 when compared to services provided by physicians, due largely to the increased need for subsequent endoscopies, specialist follow-up and primary care consultations.

CONCLUSION: Contrary to general beliefs, endoscopic services provided by nurse endoscopists are not more cost effective compared to standard service models and evidence suggests the opposite. Overall significant shortcomings and biases limit the validity and generalizability of studies that have explored safety and quality of services delivered by non-medical endoscopists.

Validation of an endoscopic part-task training box as a skill assessment tool

BACKGROUND

There is no objective methodology to assess trainee progress in endoscopy. Our prior work has detailed the development of the endoscopic part-task training box.

OBJECTIVE

To assess validity evidence regarding relationship to other variables by evaluating a correlation between level of endoscopic experience and training box score.

DESIGN

Prospective validation study.

SETTING

Three academic institutions.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 42 participants: 7 novices, 7 first-year GI fellows, 7 second-year GI fellows, 7 third-year GI fellows, 7 attending physicians, and 7 interventional attending physicians.

INTERVENTIONS

The training box consists of 5 modules: retroflexion, knob control, torque, polypectomy, and navigation/loop reduction. Performance is scored for precision and speed. Each participant was required to complete the training box once. Additionally, 5 participants at different endoscopic levels completed the training box 3 times at 1-week intervals.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

A correlation between level of endoscopic experience and training box score.

RESULTS

All 42 participants completed the 5 modules during a single session. Aggregate training box scores differed significantly between each training level (P values < .05). Individual modules significantly differentiated between experience-level groups (novices, fellows, and attending physicians; P values < .01). Participants who repeated the training box demonstrated score improvement over time, with persistence of separation between training levels.

LIMITATIONS

The training box focuses only on the technical aspects of endoscopy and does not address the cognitive elements of endoscopic training.

CONCLUSION

The endoscopic part-task training box is able to objectively assess endoscopic ability by differentiating scores based on clinical experience. Further multicenter efforts are now needed to establish learning curves and to correlate use of the simulator with improved clinical aptitude.

Technical skills and training of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for new beginners

The incidence of gastric cancer remains high in South Korea. Upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy, i.e., esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), has a higher diagnostic specificity and sensitivity than the upper GI series. Additionally, EGD has the ability to biopsy, through taking a tissue of the pathologic lesion. Successful training of EGD procedural skills require a few important things to be learned and remembered, including the posture of an examinee (e.g., left lateral decubitus and supine) and examiner (e.g., one-man standing method vs one-man sitting method), basic skills (e.g., tip deflection, push forward and pull back, and air suction and infusion), advanced skills (e.g., paradoxical movement, J-turn, and U-turn), and intubation techniques along the upper GI tract (e.g., oral cavity, pharynx, larynx including vocal cord, upper and middle and lower esophagus, gastroesophageal junction, gastric fundus, body, and antrum, duodenal bulb, and descending part of duodenum). In the current review, despite several limitations, we explained the intubation method of EGD for beginners. We hope this will be helpful to beginners who wish to learn the procedure.

[COMPETENCE OF INTRALUMINAL ENDOSCOPY SPECIALISTS: PROSPECTS AND CHALLENGES]

This article shows the current status of the establishment of endoscopists in Kazakhstan, the need for which have grown because of implementation of a population-based screening for colorectal cancer and a screening pilot project to detect cancer of esophagus and stomach. Also the article reflects the opportunities and problems of the educational process, compares the world experience in this field with real situation in Kazakhstan.

Gastrointestinal endoscopy training in general surgery residency: what has changed since 2009?

BACKGROUND

The Residency Review Committee for Surgery increased the endoscopy requirement for general surgery residents graduating in 2009 and thereafter. These changes led to the release of a position paper from 4 major gastroenterology societies claiming that the brief exposure of general surgery residents to endoscopy is not sufficient to gain competency. The societies also stated that these increased requirements will place an undue burden on gastroenterologists to supervise surgical residents in endoscopy training.

METHODS

We designed a retrospective study to see if general surgery residents at our university-based training program were able to meet the 2009 requirements, and if reliance on nonsurgical faculty has increased. The case logs of all general surgery residents graduating from our institution during seven consecutive years were reviewed.

SETTING

All endoscopic procedures were carried out at our main university hospital and at our two affiliated university hospitals. Residents spend two thirds of the year at the main campus and the remaining time at the affiliates.

RESULTS

We found that our surgical residents have met the new Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements. In our program, surgeons continue to provide most of the resident supervision for endoscopic procedures. Although there was an initial increased utilization of nonsurgical faculty for upper endoscopy, reliance on nonsurgical faculty for endoscopy training has declined every year since the guidelines were revised.

CONCLUSIONS

It is possible for general surgery residents to meet the new Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements in endoscopy without placing an undue burden on gastroenterologists.

Surgical residents' perceptions on learning gastrointestinal endoscopy: more hours and more standardization wanted

OBJECTIVE

Gastrointestinal endoscopy is a complex task that involves an interaction of cognitive and manual skills. There is no consensus on the optimal way to teach endoscopy. We sought to evaluate our formal endoscopy curriculum for general surgery trainees to improve the effectiveness and quality of the endoscopy teaching in this program.

DESIGN

We conducted focus group sessions over a 2-year period. Participants were general surgery residents, who are at the end of their endoscopy training rotation. The goal was to obtain the opinions and perceptions of trainees actively involved in learning endoscopy.

SETTING

University-based general surgery residency.

PARTICIPANTS

Second-year general surgery residents.

RESULTS

A total of 24 residents participated in 7 focus group sessions over 2 years. Four central themes emerged that included training structure and expectations, development of endoscopy competence, teaching approaches and teaching tools, and recommendations for improvement of the training experience.

CONCLUSIONS

An assessment of the themes led to the following concrete suggestions for improvement: the development of an algorithmic approach to endoscopy for the novice learner, consideration to introduce additional experience in endoscopy later in the 5-year surgery program, and consideration to incorporate a train-the-trainer curriculum for faculty that teach endoscopy.

[Endoscopy training by using ex vivo and simulators: a new teaching tool]

In recent decades, the traditional teaching model of gastrointestinal endoscopy has been based on the teacher-student tutorial method based on theoretical models. Today, simulators have the advantages of virtual reality. The handling apparatus is similar to that used in clinical practice; it is safe, which allows unlimited use, cost-effective for institutions and with superior performance over other training models. Besides, biological simulators are a viable, accessible and affordable tool to simulate gastrointestinal lesions, allowing training in endoscopy with a high degree of similarity in the endoscopic appearance. In this review, we analyze both models, showing its advantages for the training of the endoscopist of the times.

Development and initial validation of an endoscopic part-task training box

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

There is currently no objective and validated methodology available to assess the progress of endoscopy trainees or to determine when technical competence has been achieved. The aims of the current study were to develop an endoscopic part-task simulator and to assess scoring system validity.

METHODS

Fundamental endoscopic skills were determined via kinematic analysis, literature review, and expert interviews. Simulator prototypes and scoring systems were developed to reflect these skills. Validity evidence for content, internal structure, and response process was evaluated.

RESULTS

The final training box consisted of five modules (knob control, torque, retroflexion, polypectomy, and navigation and loop reduction). A total of 5 minutes were permitted per module with extra points for early completion. Content validity index (CVI)-realism was 0.88, CVI-relevance was 1.00, and CVI-representativeness was 0.88, giving a composite CVI of 0.92. Overall, 82 % of participants considered the simulator to be capable of differentiating between ability levels, and 93 % thought the simulator should be used to assess ability prior to performing procedures in patients. Inter-item assessment revealed correlations from 0.67 to 0.93, suggesting that tasks were sufficiently correlated to assess the same underlying construct, with each task remaining independent. Each module represented 16.0 % - 26.1 % of the total score, suggesting that no module contributed disproportionately to the composite score. Average box scores were 272.6 and 284.4 (P = 0.94) when performed sequentially, and average score for all participants with proctor 1 was 297.6 and 308.1 with proctor 2 (P = 0.94), suggesting reproducibility and minimal error associated with test administration.

CONCLUSION

A part-task training box and scoring system were developed to assess fundamental endoscopic skills, and validity evidence regarding content, internal structure, and response process was demonstrated.

Assessment of competence in pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy

Gastrointestinal endoscopy is an invaluable tool for the diagnosis and treatment of upper and lower gastrointestinal diseases in children. Pediatric and adult endoscopy differ in several respects including differences in procedural indications, sedation practices, pre-procedure preparation, equipment, and the importance of routine tissue sampling and terminal ileum intubation. In the same way that performance of endoscopy in children requires pediatric-specific training, assessment of pediatric endoscopists requires an approach that is tailored to pediatric practice and the use of assessment methods and measures that have been developed and validated specifically within the pediatric context.

How and how much do endoscopy professionals protect themselves against infection?

PURPOSE

It is aimed to identify, the educations given to professionals working in endoscopy units against infectious risks during the endoscopic procedures and awareness of professionals for protection from these infections.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

After obtaining the required ethic committee permissions, 50 physicians and 34 nurses, working in the endoscopy units of three university and one training and research hospital, were included in this study. A survey with 37 questions, prepared in accordance with the literature was applied to the participating endoscopist (E) and endoscopy nurses (EN). SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) for Windows 16.0 program was used for statistical evaluation of the obtained data.

FINDINGS

Forty-four (52%) of the subjects were female and 40 (48%) were male, and their average age was 39 (±6.82) years. When trainings on endoscopy of E and EN were evaluated, it was found that 44% (n = 37) of them precise an endoscopy course on endoscopy training, %56 (n = 47) received no training and they learned through master/apprentice system. Furthermore, it was found that 65% (n = 55) of the E and EN received no training on universal precautions procedures, infection and risks endoscopic procedures and only 35% (n = 29) received a specific course or on-the-job training. Nevertheless, rates of wearing protective gowns and gloves were high both for E and EN; but rate of other precautions such as wearing mask, using special gloves and face shields were found to be low. It was found that the rate of "receiving an education on endoscopy" for E was significantly higher than that of EN (p < 0001). The rate of reporting emergency situations such as contact with blood/body fluids or percutaneous injuries and the rate of taking universal precautions of EN who received an education, was statistically higher than that of EN who did not (p < 0.001 and p < 0008).

RESULTS

As a result of our investigation, it was determined that the endoscopists and endoscopy nurses did not effectively apply the universal precautions against infectious risks faced during endoscopic procedures and did not receive the basic trainings. The professionals who received training were more responsive for this issue. According to our results, organizing continuous training programs through endoscopy professionals is necessary to provide the universal precautions of avoiding exposure to blood and body fluids.

Role of observation of live cases done by Japanese experts in the acquisition of ESD skills by a western endoscopist

AIM: To evaluate the role of observation of experts performing endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the acquisition of ESD skills.

METHODS: This prospective study is documenting the learning curve of one Western endoscopist. The study consisted of three periods. In the first period (pre-observation), the trainee performed ESDs in animal models in his home institution in the United States. The second period (observation) consisted of visit to Japan and observation of live ESD cases done by experts. The observation of cases occurred over a 5-wk period. During the third period (post-observation), the trainee performed ESD in animal models in a similar fashion as in the first period. Three animal models were used: live 40-50 kg Yorkshire pig, explanted pig stomach model, and explanted pig rectum model. The outcomes from the ESDs done in the animal models before and after observation of live human cases (main study intervention) were compared. Statistical analysis of the data included: Fisher’s exact test to compare distributions of a categorical variable, Wilcoxon rank sum test to compare distributions of a continuous variable between the two groups (pre-observation and post-observation), and Kruskal-Wallis test to evaluate the impact of lesion location and type of model (ex-vivo vs live pig) on lesion removal time.

RESULTS: The trainee performed 38 ESDs in animal model (29 pre-observation/9 post-observation). The removal times post-observation were significantly shorter than those pre-observation (32.7 ± 15.0 min vs 63.5 ± 9.8 min, P < 0.001). To minimize the impact of improving physician skill, the 9 lesions post-observation were compared to the last 9 lesions pre-observation and the removal times remained significantly shorter (32.7 ± 15.0 min vs 61.0 ± 7.4 min, P = 0.0011). Regression analysis showed that ESD observation significantly reduced removal time when controlling for the sequence of lesion removal (P = 0.025). Furthermore, it was also noted a trend towards decrease in failure to remove lesions and decrease in complications after the period of observation. This study did not find a significant difference in the time needed to remove lesions in different animal models. This finding could have important implications in designing training programs due to the substantial difference in cost between live animal and explanted organ models. The main limitation of this study is that it reflects the experience of a single endoscopist.

CONCLUSION: Observation of experts performing ESD over short period of time can significantly contribute to the acquisition of ESD skills.

Small-bowel endoscopy core curriculum

This is one of a series of documents prepared by the ASGE Training Committee. This curriculum document contains recommendations for training, intended for use by endoscopy training directors, endoscopists involved in teaching endoscopy, and trainees in endoscopy. It was developed as an overview of techniques currently favored for the performance and training of small-bowel endoscopy and to serve as a guide to published references, videotapes, and other resources available to the trainer. By providing information to endoscopy trainers about the common practices used by experts in performing the technical aspects of the procedure, the ASGE hopes to improve the teaching and performance of small-bowel endoscopy.

Quality and safety issues in procedural rural practice: a prospective evaluation of current quality and safety guidelines in 3000 colonoscopies

INTRODUCTION

Colonoscopy remains the gold standard for the investigation and management of bowel pathology. A 2009 National Bowel Cancer Screening Program Quality Working Group report revealed that small rural towns in inner regional Victoria, Australia, for example Echuca (Rural and Remote Metropolitan Areas [RRMA] 4), registered 10.5 colonoscopies per 1000 population versus 18.5 per 1000 in the state capital Melbourne. Reasons for this discrepancy include lack of skilled practitioners in rural communities and travel time for patients to attend larger centres when the required bowel preparation or mobility issues limit access. Ideally, services are high quality, safe and local. This study assessed the quality and safety of a rural GP colonoscopy service.

METHODS

The indications, findings, caecal intubation rates, complications and completion time were recorded for 3000 serial colonoscopies performed by one rural procedural GP from 1995 to 2011 in Victorian Echuca. Quality was assessed using caecal intubation rate, polyp and colorectal carcinoma detection rates, and completion time. Safety was determined by complication rates.

RESULTS

The caecal intubation rate was 97% (excluding stenosing lesions), polypectomy detection rate was 39%, carcinoma detection rate was 2%, and the average time to completion was 17 min. Re-admission rates were 1.6/1000 for haemorrhage and 1.2/1000 for perforation. There were no deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this study compare favourably with published international standards, validate Australian general practice procedural training standards, and validate the additional quality measure of 'colonoscopy completion time'. Rural GPs can provide a safe and high quality service. Extending this service model to similar settings could improve reduced access to colonoscopy for rural Australians.

Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, training in gastrointestinal endoscopy has been based upon an apprenticeship model, with novice endoscopists learning basic skills under the supervision of experienced preceptors in the clinical setting. Over the last two decades, however, the growing awareness of the need for patient safety has brought the issue of simulation-based training to the forefront. While the use of simulation-based training may have important educational and societal advantages, the effectiveness of virtual reality gastrointestinal endoscopy simulators has yet to be clearly demonstrated.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether virtual reality simulation training can supplement and/or replace early conventional endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) in diagnostic oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy and/or sigmoidoscopy for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience.

SEARCH METHODS

Health professions, educational and computer databases were searched until November 2011 including The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Biosis Previews, CINAHL, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, ERIC, Education Full Text, CBCA Education, Career and Technical Education @ Scholars Portal, Education Abstracts @ Scholars Portal, Expanded Academic ASAP @ Scholars Portal, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Abstracts in New Technologies and Engineering and Computer & Information Systems Abstracts. The grey literature until November 2011 was also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials comparing virtual reality endoscopy (oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy) simulation training versus any other method of endoscopy training including conventional patient-based training, in-job training, training using another form of endoscopy simulation (e.g. low-fidelity simulator), or no training (however defined by authors) were included.  Trials comparing one method of virtual reality training versus another method of virtual reality training (e.g. comparison of two different virtual reality simulators) were also included. Only trials measuring outcomes on humans in the clinical setting (as opposed to animals or simulators) were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors (CMS, MES) independently assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of trials, and extracted data on the trial characteristics and outcomes. Due to significant clinical and methodological heterogeneity it was not possible to pool study data in order to perform a meta-analysis. Where data were available for each continuous outcome we calculated standardized mean difference with 95% confidence intervals based on intention-to-treat analysis. Where data were available for dichotomous outcomes we calculated relative risk with 95% confidence intervals based on intention-to-treat-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen trials, with 278 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared simulation-based training with conventional patient-based endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) whereas nine trials compared simulation-based training with no training. Only three trials were at low risk of bias. Simulation-based training, as compared with no training, generally appears to provide participants with some advantage over their untrained peers as measured by composite score of competency, independent procedure completion, performance time, independent insertion depth, overall rating of performance or competency error rate and mucosal visualization. Alternatively, there was no conclusive evidence that simulation-based training was superior to conventional patient-based training, although data were limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this systematic review indicate that virtual reality endoscopy training can be used to effectively supplement early conventional endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) in diagnostic oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy and/or sigmoidoscopy for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience. However, there remains insufficient evidence to advise for or against the use of virtual reality simulation-based training as a replacement for early conventional endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience. There is a great need for the development of a reliable and valid measure of endoscopic performance prior to the completion of further randomised clinical trials with high methodological quality.

How to teach and learn endoscopic submucosal dissection for upper gastrointestinal neoplasm in Japan

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an innovative and promising procedure. However, ESD experience is mostly limited to Japan and a few countries in Asia. An appropriate training system should be proposed from Japan to promote a permeation of ESD technique. We conducted questionnaire survey to representative Japanese experts to reveal their training method of ESD for upper gastrointestinal neoplasm.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We sent the questionnaire on gastric and esophageal ESD to 9 Japanese experts in ESD. The questionnaire results were discussed in a session of Endoscopic Forum Japan 2011 held in Tokyo.

RESULTS

The inception criteria consisted of two main elements, diagnostic ability and primary endoscopy technique of preceptees. Preceptees should observe and attend as many ESD cases as possible. Most of the experts recommend training with isolated or live animal stomach or esophagus. Lesion in the distal stomach is the most suitable for the first real ESD by a preceptee. Being proficient in a gastric ESD is needed before starting esophageal ESD. Preceptor should have significantly high level of diagnostic ability and proficient ESD techniques in the colorectum as well as the stomach and esophagus.

CONCLUSION

The present questionnaire survey seems to reveal basic elements required for ESD training program. We believe that this is also helpful in other countries where ESD would be initiated and penetrated safely and properly.

The box simulator is useful for training novice endoscopists in basic endoscopic techniques

PURPOSE

The present study was aimed at evaluating the usefulness of box simulators for training novice endoscopists.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An explanation of the goals, contents, and features of the simulator was given to study participants. The participants then received "hands-on training" in gastrointestinal endoscopy techniques using a box simulator. Subsequently, they were asked to answer 19 structured questions about the simulator. Ratings were scored on a scale from 1 to 5 for questions concerning their first impression of the simulator. Questions on the usefulness of the simulator and the training course were answered as "agree", "disagree", or "no opinion".

RESULTS

A total of 32 participants filled out the questionnaire. The mean scores on the simulator's usefulness, features, and realistic movements before the training were between 1.5 and 2.0. There were no significant differences between the mean values of the scores given by novice users compared to non-novice users. However, after receiving training on the simulator, 90.6% of the participants considered the box simulator a generally useful tool for learning basic endoscopic techniques, and 90.6% agreed that the simulator was useful for improving hand-eye coordination.

CONCLUSION

Box simulators may be useful for training novice endoscopists in basic gastrointestinal endoscopic techniques.

Endoscopy training in primary care: innovative training program to increase access to endoscopy in primary care

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant source of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Colonoscopy can be an extension of the care provided by a family physician to help substantially reduce CRC morbidity and mortality. Family physicians trained in colonoscopy can provide access to care in rural and medically underserved areas.

METHODS

The Department of Family Medicine and the Colorado Area Health Education Center (AHEC) developed the Endoscopy Training for Primary Care (ETPC) program to teach primary care physicians to perform colonoscopy. The program included online didactic education, a formal endoscopy simulator experience, and proctoring by a current endoscopist. Participants completed a baseline and follow-up survey assessing CRC screening knowledge and the effectiveness of the endoscopy training for ongoing screening activities.

RESULTS

To date, 94 practitioners and health professional students have participated in the study. Ninety-one (97%) completed the online didactic portion of the training. Sixty-five participants (77%) were physicians or medical students, and the majority (64%) was in the field of family medicine. The year 4 (2011) follow-up cohort was comprised of 62% respondents working in an urban background and 26% in rural communities. Many participants remain in a queue for proctoring by a trained endoscopist. Several participants are successfully performing a significant number of colonoscopies.

CONCLUSIONS

ETPC program showed success in recruiting a large number of physicians and students to participate in training. The program enhanced perceptions about the value of colon cancer screening and providing screening endoscopy in primary care practice. Providing sites for simulation training throughout Colorado provided opportunity for providers in rural regions to participate. As a result of this training, thousands of patients underwent testing to prevent colon cancer. Future research relating to colonoscopy training by family physicians should focus on quality assurance and determining best methods for procedural competence.

[Endoscopic submucosal dissection: only for expert endoscopists?]

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be applied to early gastrointestinal cancers. This technique was developed to achieve radical curative resection and to reduce unnecessary surgical interventions. ESD was designed in eastern countries and is not widely used in the West. Although ESD represents a major therapeutic advance in endoscopy and is performed with curative intent, the complication rate (hemorrhage, perforation) is higher than reported in other techniques, requiring from endoscopists the acquirement of technical skill and experience through a structured and progressive training program to reduce the morbidity associated with this technique and increase its potential benefits. Although there is substantial published evidence on the applications and results of ESD, there are few publications on training in this technique and a standardized training program is lacking. The current article aims to describe the various proposals for training, as well as the basic principles of the technique, its indications, and the results obtained, since theoretical knowledge that would guide endoscopists during the clinical application of ESD is advisable before training begins. Training in an endoscopic technique has a little value without knowledge of the technique's aims, the situations in which it should be applied, and the results that can be expected.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on safety and quality indicators in endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Increasing use of gastrointestinal endoscopy, particularly for colorectal cancer screening, and increasing emphasis on health care quality, highlight the need for clearly defined, evidence-based processes to support quality improvement in endoscopy.

OBJECTIVE

To identify processes and indicators of quality and safety relevant to high-quality endoscopy service delivery.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary group of 35 voting participants developed recommendation statements and performance indicators. Systematic literature searches generated 50 initial statements that were revised iteratively following a modified Delphi approach using a web-based evaluation and voting tool. Statement development and evidence evaluation followed the AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines, REsearch and Evaluation) and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) guidelines. At the consensus conference, participants voted anonymously on all statements using a 6-point scale. Subsequent web-based voting evaluated recommendations for specific, individual quality indicators, safety indicators and mandatory endoscopy reporting fields. Consensus was defined a priori as agreement by 80% of participants.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 23 recommendation statements addressing the following: ethics (statement 1: agreement 100%), facility standards and policies (statements 2 to 9: 90% to 100%), quality assurance (statements 10 to 13: 94% to 100%), training, education, competency and privileges (statements 14 to 19: 97% to 100%), endoscopy reporting standards (statements 20 and 21: 97% to 100%) and patient perceptions (statements 22 and 23: 100%). Additionally, 18 quality indicators (agreement 83% to 100%), 20 safety indicators (agreement 77% to 100%) and 23 recommended endoscopy-reporting elements (agreement 91% to 100%) were identified.

DISCUSSION

The consensus process identified a clear need for high-quality clinical and outcomes research to support quality improvement in the delivery of endoscopy services.

CONCLUSIONS

The guidelines support quality improvement in endoscopy by providing explicit recommendations on systematic monitoring, assessment and modification of endoscopy service delivery to yield benefits for all patients affected by the practice of gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Basic requirements of gastroenterologists to treat upper gastrointestinal bleeding: competency and sedation issues

This article reviews the components of adequate training required for a gastroenterologist to treat upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The current status of endoscopic simulators is critically reviewed to determine whether these should be part of the UGIB armamentarium in the training of individuals and whether credentialing could be accomplished through this method of instruction. Finally, the author discusses the appropriate use of sedation in patients with UGIB.

Training on an ex vivo animal model improves endoscopic skills: a randomized, single-blind study

BACKGROUND

Animal models are used for training of different endoscopic procedures. Whether this really improves endoscopic skills remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of training by using an ex vivo animal gastric model on the performance of two therapeutic procedures-hemostasis and treatment of perforation.

DESIGN

A randomized, single-blind study.

SETTING

An experimental endoscopy center in a university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-one gastroenterology fellows with comparable endoscopic experience.

METHODS

Participants were randomized into two groups: with (T, n = 16) and without (S, n = 15) training. All fellows continued with standard endoscopic practice. Baseline skills were assessed at enrollment. All physicians in group T underwent 2 full days of a hands-on course over a 3-month period, in addition to their standard endoscopic practice. Both groups then underwent a blinded, final evaluation. Endoscopic skills were scored from 1 (best) to 5 (poorest) by two expert, blinded tutors. Outcomes of clinical hemostatic procedures also were analyzed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Successful hemostasis and successful perforation closure.

RESULTS

Thirty physicians completed the study. Hemostasis results (n = 15): The number of physicians who carried out a successful hemostasis procedure increased significantly in the group with training (27% vs 73%; P = .009) but did not change in the group without training (20% vs 20%). The mean scores of injection and clipping technique improved significantly only after training. The number of clips used decreased significantly only in the group with training; the time of clipping did not change significantly in either group. Perforation results (n = 15): The number of physicians with a successful and complete perforation closure increased nearly significantly in the group with training (40% vs 73%, P = .06) as opposed to the group without training (27% vs 47%; P = .27). The procedure time decreased significantly in the group with training only. In clinical practice, fellows in group T had a significantly higher success rate with respect to hemostatic procedures (83.2%, range 67-100 vs 63.6%, range 25-100; P = .0447). The majority of participants (93%) agreed that such courses should be compulsory in gastroenterological credentials.

LIMITATIONS

A retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes. Clinical outcome data were based on self-reporting of the participants.

CONCLUSION

Hands-on training by using an animal ex vivo model improves endoscopic skills in both hemostasis and perforation closure. In clinical practice, the training improves the outcome of hemostatic procedures.

Education can improve inter-observer agreement in double balloon endoscopy assessment

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Double balloon endoscopy (DBE) diagnoses are difficult because of the frequent occurrence of tiny lesions or longitudinally arranged erythema, which may result from true pathologies or contact trauma during DBE insertion. This study was performed to explore interobserver agreement for DBE assessment and to determine whether this can be improved by educating endoscopists.

METHODOLOGY

Three experienced endoscopists independently evaluated DBE pictures of an initial training set, consisting of 124 lesions in 78 patients with suspected small bowel bleeding. Each endoscopist made DBE diagnoses independently and assessed whether each lesion was or was not a source of bleeding. Tiny lesions were assessed twice, assuming they had been detected during DBE insertion and/or DBE withdrawal. After two sessions of consensus review by the endoscopists, they evaluated a second, validation set consisting of an additional 43 lesions in 30 patients.

RESULTS

Inter-observer agreement with respect to DBE assessment was moderate in the initial training set, but improved to good in the second validation set. The proportion of diagnoses changed to DBE contact lesions when they were assumed to be detected during DBE withdrawal decreased in the second validation set.

CONCLUSIONS

Although inter-observer agreement for DBE assessment is not excellent, it can be improved by education of endoscopists.

Early surgeon impressions and technical difficulty associated with laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: a Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons Learning Center study

BACKGROUND

Interest in laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) is growing rapidly among surgeons. This study aimed to characterize current surgeon impressions about LESS and to determine the relative difficulty of performing a simulated LESS task using a multiport access device.

METHODS

This study was conducted at the 2009 Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Learning Center. The 56 study participants were asked to complete pre- and post-test questionnaires regarding their level of training, prior clinical experience, and opinions about LESS. Technical skill performance was evaluated using the standardized fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery Peg Transfer task scored according to time and error metrics. The participants completed three repetitions: conventional laparoscopy (LAP), LESS with nonarticulated instruments (LESS Straight), and LESS with articulated instruments (LESS Articulating).

RESULTS

Complete data were collected for 45 (80%) of the 56 participants, which included 27 practicing surgeons, nine minimally invasive surgery (MIS) fellows, seven residents, and two allied health professionals. Five surgeons (LESS experienced) had managed at least one LESS case in the preceding 6 months. Participants rated their comfort with LESS as 2.0 ± 1.2 (5-point scale, 1 = very uncomfortable). Compared with conventional laparoscopy, the participants indicated that LESS had 97% better cosmesis, 25% decreased postoperative pain, 18% faster recovery, 97% more demanding, 73% increased rate of complications, and 82% anticipated wide adoption. They all indicated a readiness to offer LESS to their patients if appropriately trained. Peg Transfer performance was significantly worse for LESS than for LAP (40-65% performance decline), and for LESS Articulating than for LESS Straight (44% performance decline). Construct validity for the LESS simulated tasks was supported because the LESS-experienced scores were significantly better than the LESS-nonexpert scores.

CONCLUSION

Despite the increased technical difficulty associated with the LESS approach, surgeons are enthusiastic about offering these techniques and seeking additional training. Robust simulation-based methods that foster skill acquisition through repetitive practice and verification of proficiency are needed such that safe adoption may be fostered.

A design of hardware haptic interface for gastrointestinal endoscopy simulation

Gastrointestinal endoscopy simulations have been developed to train endoscopic procedures which require hundreds of practices to be competent in the skills. Even though realistic haptic feedback is important to provide realistic sensation to the user, most of previous simulations including commercialized simulation have mainly focused on providing realistic visual feedback. In this paper, we propose a novel design of portable haptic interface, which provides 2DOF force feedback, for the gastrointestinal endoscopy simulation. The haptic interface consists of translational and rotational force feedback mechanism which are completely decoupled, and gripping mechanism for controlling connection between the endoscope and the force feedback mechanism.