Procedural Performance in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Live and Simulated

Endoscopic Skills Training: The Impact of Virtual Exercises on Simulated Colonoscopy

Background

A previous study suggested that psychomotor training improves the performance on colonoscopy. Since then, newer exercises have been included in the latest generation of GI Mentor®. In order to optimize a colonoscopy training program, we aimed to determine the impact of 3 virtual exercises in simulated colonoscopy skills.

Methods

This was a prospective and randomized study. Nineteen residents completed a pre-training questionnaire and a colonoscopy trial before randomization in a study group (n = 10) that performed three exercises (Endobubble I, Navigation I, and Mucosal Evaluation I) until they achieved expert level, and a control group (n = 9). Both groups performed 10 repetitions of a simulated colonoscopy and were assessed on a final case. Learning curves and skills transfer were assessed by four parameters: mucosal surface examined (%), time to reach the cecum (s), screening efficiency (%), and time the patient was in pain (%). We also evaluated the construct validity for the exercises.

Results

Construct validity was confirmed for Endobubble I and verified in Navigation I (experts were faster than novices; 5 vs. 7 s, p = 0.040), but not for Mucosal Evaluation I. Analyzing the learning curves and performance in the 10 repetitions, the study group reached the cecum faster (278 vs. 356 s, p = 0.035) and achieved a higher screening efficiency (83% vs. 75%, p = 0.019). Concerning skills transfer, the control group took longer to reach the cecum (241 vs. 292 s, p = 0.021) and the percentage of time the patient was in pain was higher (6% vs. 9%, p = 0.021). General performances of the study group had smaller interquartile variations.

Conclusion

Psychomotor training has a significant impact on the homogeneous acquisition and assimilation of colonoscopy skills. Endobubble I and Navigation I should be considered in the training programs for novices.

[Clinical and Technical Guideline for Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Solid Tumor: Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy]

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy appointed a Task Force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence- based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.

Clinical and Technical Guideline for Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Solid Tumor: Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE)

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) appointed a task force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.

Clinical and Technical Guideline for Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Solid Tumor: Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE)

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) appointed a task force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.

Optimizing cytological specimens of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions: A pilot study to the effect of a smear preparation training for endoscopy personnel on sample quality and accuracy

BACKGROUND

In the absence of rapid on-side pathological evaluation, endoscopy staff generally "smears" endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) specimens on a glass slide. As this technique is vulnerable to preparation artifacts, we assessed if its quality could be improved through a smear-preparation-training for endoscopy staff.

METHODS

In this prospective pilot study, 10 endosonographers and 12 endoscopy nurses from seven regional EUS-centers in the Netherlands were invited to participate in a EUS-FNA smear-preparation-training. Subsequently, post training slides derived from solid pancreatic lesions were compared to pre-training "control" slides. Primary outcome was to assess if the training positively affects smear quality and, consequently, diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions.

RESULTS

Participants collected and prepared 71 cases, mostly pancreatic head lesions (48%). Sixty-eight controls were selected from the pretraining period. The presence of artifacts was comparable for smears performed before and after training (76% vs 82%, P = .36). Likewise, smear cellularity (≥50% target cells) before and after training did not differ (44% (30/68) vs 49% (35/71), P = .48). Similar, no difference in diagnostic accuracy for malignancy was detected (P = .10).

CONCLUSION

In this pilot EUS-FNA smear-preparation-training for endoscopy personnel, smear quality and diagnostic accuracy were not improved after the training. Based on these results, we plan to further study other training programs and possibilities.

ASGE EndoVators Summit: simulators and the future of endoscopic training

Interest in the use of simulation for acquiring, maintaining, and assessing skills in GI endoscopy has grown over the past decade, as evidenced by recent American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines encouraging the use of endoscopy simulation training and its incorporation into training standards by a key accreditation organization. An EndoVators Summit, partially supported by a grant from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) of the National Institutes of Health, (NIH) was held at the ASGE Institute for Training and Technology from November 19 to 20, 2017. The summit brought together over 70 thought leaders in simulation research and simulator development and key decision makers from industry. Proceedings opened with a historical review of the role of simulation in medicine and an outline of priority areas related to the emerging role of simulation training within medicine broadly. Subsequent sessions addressed the summit's purposes: to review the current state of endoscopy simulation and the role it could play in endoscopic training, to define the role and value of simulators in the future of endoscopic training and to reach consensus regarding priority areas for simulation-related education and research and simulator development. This white paper provides an overview of the central points raised by presenters, synthesizes the discussions on the key issues under consideration, and outlines actionable items and/or areas of consensus reached by summit participants and society leadership pertinent to each session. The goal was to provide a working roadmap for the developers of simulators, the investigators who strive to define the optimal use of endoscopy-related simulation and assess its impact on educational outcomes and health care quality, and the educators who seek to enhance integration of simulation into training and practice.

Validation of a realistic, simple, and inexpensive EUS-FNA training model using isolated porcine stomach

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Trainees are required to learn EUS-FNA using a model before working with a patient. The aim of the current study was to validate a new training model developed for EUS-FNA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Several fresh chicken tenderloins were embedded as target lesions in the submucosal layer of an isolated porcine stomach. The stomach was fixed to a plate with nails, and was placed in a tub filled with water. The primary endpoint was feasibility of the newly developed model for EUS-FNA training, evaluated as follows: 1) visualization of the target lesion with blinding for lesion location; 2) penetrability of the needle; 3) sampling rate of macroscopic specimen; and 4) ROSE capability. Secondary endpoints were its durability and utility for multiple EUS-FNA procedures during EUS-FNA training, and the ease and cost of preparing the model.

RESULTS

Six endoscopists (1 expert, 5 trainees) attempted EUS-FNA procedures using this model. The target lesion could be identified clearly, and EUS-FNA could be performed with realistic resistance felt. In addition, rapid on-site evaluation could be easily achieved. Based on 10 needlings by each endoscopist, adequate specimens for histology could be macroscopically taken with an average 85 % success rate. Visibility and maneuverability were maintained throughout all needlings. Preparation time for this model was less than 30 minutes with a total cost of $ 22.

CONCLUSIONS

An easy-to-use and inexpensive training model with a realistic feel of needling was created. This model can potentially enable beginners to practice safe and effective EUS-FNA procedures.

Simulator training in gastrointestinal endoscopy - From basic training to advanced endoscopic procedures

Simulator-based gastrointestinal endoscopy training has gained acceptance over the last decades and has been extensively studied. Several types of simulators have been validated and it has been demonstrated that the use of simulators in the early training setting accelerates the learning curve in acquiring basic skills. Current GI endoscopy simulators lack the degree of realism that would be necessary to provide training to achieve full competency or to be applicable in certification. Virtual Reality and mechanical simulators are commonly used in basic flexible endoscopy training, whereas ex vivo and in vivo models are used in training the most advanced endoscopic procedures. Validated models for the training of more routine therapeutic interventions like polypectomy, EMR, stenting and haemostasis are lacking or scarce and developments in these areas should be encouraged.

In-training gastrointestinal endoscopy competency assessment tools: Types of tools, validation and impact

The ability to perform endoscopy procedures safely, effectively and efficiently is a core element of gastroenterology practice. Training programs strive to ensure learners demonstrate sufficient competence to deliver high quality endoscopic care independently at completion of training. In-training assessments are an essential component of gastrointestinal endoscopy education, required to support training and optimize learner's capabilities. There are several approaches to in-training endoscopy assessment from direct observation of procedural skills to monitoring of surrogate measures of endoscopy skills such as procedural volume and quality metrics. This review outlines the current state of evidence as it pertains to in-training assessment of competency in performing gastrointestinal endoscopy as part of an overall endoscopy quality and skills training program.

Training and competence assessment in GI endoscopy: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Training procedural skills in GI endoscopy once focused on threshold numbers. As threshold numbers poorly reflect individual competence, the focus gradually shifts towards a more individual approach. Tools to assess and document individual learning progress are being developed and incorporated in dedicated training curricula. However, there is a lack of consensus and training guidelines differ worldwide, which reflects uncertainties on optimal set-up of a training programme.

AIMS

The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the currently available literature for the use of training and assessment methods in GI endoscopy. Second, we aimed to identify the role of simulator-based training as well as the value of continuous competence assessment in patient-based training. Third, we aimed to propose a structured training curriculum based on the presented evidence.

METHODS

A literature search was carried out in the available medical and educational literature databases. The results were systematically reviewed and studies were included using a predefined protocol with independent assessment by two reviewers and a final consensus round.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 5846 studies. Ninety-four relevant studies on simulators, assessment methods, learning curves and training programmes for GI endoscopy met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-seven studies on simulator validation were included. Good validity was demonstrated for four simulators. Twenty-three studies reported on simulator training and learning curves, including 17 randomised control trials. Increased performance on a virtual reality (VR) simulator was shown in all studies. Improved performance in patient-based assessment was demonstrated in 14 studies. Four studies reported on the use of simulators for assessment of competence levels. Current simulators lack the discriminative power to determine competence levels in patient-based endoscopy. Eight out of 14 studies on colonoscopy, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endosonography reported on learning curves in patient-based endoscopy and proved the value of this approach for measuring performance. Ten studies explored the numbers needed to gain competence, but the proposed thresholds varied widely between them. Five out of nine studies describing the development and evaluation of assessment tools for GI endoscopy provided insight into the performance of endoscopists. Five out of seven studies proved that intense training programmes result in good performance.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of validated VR simulators in the early training setting accelerates the learning of practical skills. Learning curves are valuable for the continuous assessment of performance and are more relevant than threshold numbers. Future research will strengthen these conclusions by evaluating simulation-based as well as patient-based training in GI endoscopy. A complete curriculum with the assessment of competence throughout training needs to be developed for all GI endoscopy procedures.

Variation in learning curves and competence for ERCP among advanced endoscopy trainees by using cumulative sum analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There are limited data on learning curves and competence in ERCP. By using a standardized data collection tool, we aimed to prospectively define learning curves and measure competence among advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs) by using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis.

METHODS

AETs were evaluated by attending endoscopists starting with the 26th hands-on ERCP examination and then every ERCP examination during the 12-month training period. A standardized ERCP competency assessment tool (using a 4-point scoring system) was used to grade the examination. CUSUM analysis was applied to produce learning curves for individual technical and cognitive components of ERCP performance (success defined as a score of 1, acceptable and unacceptable failures [p1] of 10% and 20%, respectively). Sensitivity analyses varying p1 and by using a less-stringent definition of success were performed.

RESULTS

Five AETs were included with a total of 1049 graded ERCPs (mean ± SD, 209.8 ± 91.6/AET). The majority of cases were performed for a biliary indication (80%). The overall and native papilla allowed cannulation times were 3.1 ± 3.6 and 5.7 ± 4, respectively. Overall learning curves demonstrated substantial variability for individual technical and cognitive endpoints. Although nearly all AETs achieved competence in overall cannulation, none achieved competence for cannulation in cases with a native papilla. Sensitivity analyses increased the proportion of AETs who achieved competence.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that there is substantial variability in ERCP learning curves among AETs. A specific case volume does not ensure competence, especially for native papilla cannulation.

Variation in Aptitude of Trainees in Endoscopic Ultrasonography, Based on Cumulative Sum Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Studies have reported substantial variation in the competency of advanced endoscopy trainees, indicating a need for more supervised training in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). We used a standardized, validated, data collection tool to evaluate learning curves and measure competency in EUS among trainees at multiple centers.

METHODS

In a prospective study performed at 15 centers, 17 trainees with no prior EUS experience were evaluated by experienced attending endosonographers at the 25th and then every 10th upper EUS examination, over a 12-month training period. A standardized data collection form was used (using a 5-point scoring system) to grade the EUS examination. Cumulative sum analysis was applied to produce a learning curve for each trainee; it tracked the overall performance based on median scores at different stations and also at each station. Competency was defined by a median score of 1, with acceptable and unacceptable failure rates of 10% and 20%, respectively.

RESULTS

Twelve trainees were included in the final analysis. Each of the trainees performed 265 to 540 EUS examinations (total, 4257 examinations). There was a large amount of variation in their learning curves: 2 trainees crossed the threshold for acceptable performance (at cases 225 and 245), 2 trainees had a trend toward acceptable performance (after 289 and 355 cases) but required continued observation, and 8 trainees needed additional training and observation. Similar results were observed at individual stations.

CONCLUSIONS

A specific case load does not ensure competency in EUS; 225 cases should be considered the minimum caseload for training because we found that no trainee achieved competency before this point. Ongoing training should be provided for trainees until competency is confirmed using objective measures.

Tools for the direct observation and assessment of psychomotor skills in medical trainees: a systematic review

CONTEXT

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestone Project mandates programmes to assess the attainment of training outcomes, including the psychomotor (surgical or procedural) skills of medical trainees. The objectives of this study were to determine which tools exist to directly assess psychomotor skills in medical trainees on live patients and to identify the data indicating their psychometric and edumetric properties.

METHODS

An electronic search was conducted for papers published from January 1948 to May 2011 using the PubMed, Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Web of Science electronic databases and the review of references in article bibliographies. A study was included if it described a tool or instrument designed for the direct observation of psychomotor skills in patient care settings by supervisors. Studies were excluded if they referred to tools that assessed only clinical or non-technical skills, involved non-medical health professionals, or assessed skills performed on a simulator. Overall, 4114 citations were screened, 168 (4.1%) articles were reviewed for eligibility and 51 (1.2%) manuscripts were identified as meeting the study inclusion criteria. Three authors abstracted and reviewed studies using a standardised form for the presence of key psychometric and edumetric elements as per ACGME and American Psychological Association (APA) recommendations, and also assigned an overall grade based on the ACGME Committee on Educational Outcome Assessment grading system.

RESULTS

A total of 30 tools were identified. Construct validity based on associations between scores and training level was identified in 24 tools, internal consistency in 14, test-retest reliability in five and inter-rater reliability in 20. The modification of attitudes, knowledge or skills was reported using five tools. The seven-item Global Rating Scale and the Procedure-Based Assessment received an overall Class 1 ACGME grade and are recommended based on Level A ACGME evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Numerous tools are available for the assessment of psychomotor skills in medical trainees, but evidence supporting their psychometric and edumetric properties is limited.

Learning curves for EUS by using cumulative sum analysis: implications for American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy recommendations for training

BACKGROUND

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endsocopy (ASGE) guidelines for assessing minimal competence in EUS are based on expert opinion and retrospective studies.

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively define learning curves in EUS among advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs).

DESIGN

Prospective trial.

SETTING

Three tertiary-care referral centers.

PATIENTS

AETs with no prior EUS experience.

INTERVENTION

AETs were evaluated by attending endosonographers at intervals of 10 EUS examinations (beginning at the 25th examination) during a 12-month training period. A standardized data collection form was used to grade examination of EUS anatomic stations and, when applicable, lesion of interest, accurate uTNM staging, wall layer origin of subepithelial lesions, and technical success with FNA.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Cumulative sum analysis was applied to assess competency and produce a learning curve for each trainee for overall performance and for each anatomic station. Acceptable and unacceptable failure rates of 10% and 20%, respectively, were used.

RESULTS

Five AETs were included, with a total of 1412 EUS examinations (AET1-225, T2-175, T3-402, T4-315, T5-295). Two AETs crossed the threshold for acceptable performance at cases number 255 and 295, two AETs showed a trend toward acceptable performance after 225 and 196 cases but needed ongoing training, and 1 AET demonstrated the need for ongoing training after 402 cases. Similar variable results were noted for individual stations.

LIMITATIONS

Results from this study may not be generalizable to other centers' AETs.

CONCLUSION

We observed substantial variability in achieving competency and a consistent need for more supervision in all AETs than current recommendations (150 cases). Future studies should focus on standardization of trainee performance, definition of competency, and widespread applicability of AET evaluation.