Senior Surgical Resident Confidence in Performing Flexible Endoscopy: What Can We Do Differently?

Current status of resident simulation training curricula: pearls and pitfalls

BACKGROUND

Residency programs are required to incorporate simulation into their training program. Ideally, simulation provides a safe environment for a trainee to be exposed to both common and challenging clinical scenarios. The purpose of this review is to detail the current state of the most commonly used laparoscopic, endoscopic, and robotic surgery simulation programs in general surgery residency education, including resources required for successful implementation and benchmarks for evaluation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Members of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Resident and Fellow Task Force (RAFT) Committee performed a literature review using PubMed and training websites. Information regarding the components of the most commonly used laparoscopic, endoscopic, and/or robotic simulation curriculum, including both formal and informal benchmarks for evaluating training competence, were collected.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic simulation revolves around the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS). Proficiency-based as well as virtual simulation have been utilized for FLS training curricula. Challenges include less direct translation to the technical complexities that can arise in laparoscopic surgery. Endoscopic simulation focuses on the Fundamentals of Endoscopic Surgery. There are virtual reality simulation platforms that can be used for skills assessment and training. Challenges include simulator types and access, as well as structured mentoring and feedback. Robotic simulation training curricula have not been standardized. Simulation includes one primary technology, which can be prohibitive based on cost and requirements for onboarding.

CONCLUSIONS

While surgical simulation seems to be a fundamental and integrated part of surgical training, it requires a significant number of resources, which can be daunting for residency training programs. Regardless of the barriers outlined, the need for surgical simulation in laparoscopy, endoscopy, and robotics at surgical education training programs is clear.

Practice patterns and outcomes of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty based on provider specialty

Background and study aims Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is performed in clinical practice by gastroenterologists and bariatric surgeons. Given the increasing regulatory approval and global adoption, we aimed to evaluate real-world outcomes in multidisciplinary practices involving bariatric surgeons and gastroenterologists across the United States. Patients and methods We included adult patients with obesity who underwent ESG from January 2013 to August 2022 in seven academic and private centers in the United States. Patient and procedure characteristics, serious adverse events (SAEs), and weight loss outcomes up to 24 months were analyzed. SPSS (version 29.0) was used for all statistical analyses. Results A total of 1506 patients from seven sites included 235 (15.6%) treated by surgeons and 1271 (84.4%) treated by gastroenterologists. There were no baseline differences between groups. Gastroenterologists used argon plasma coagulation for marking significantly more often than surgeons ( P <0.001). Surgeons placed sutures in the fundus in all instances whereas gastroenterologist placed them in the fundus in less than 1% of the cases ( P <0.001>). Procedure times were significantly different between groups, with surgeons requiring approximately 20 minutes more during the procedure than gastroenterologists ( P <0.001). Percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) and percent responders achieving >10 and >15% TBWL were similar between the two groups at 12, 18, and 24 months. Rates of SAEs were low and similar at 1.7% for surgeons and 2.7% for gastroenterologists ( P >0.05). Conclusions Data from a large US cohort show significant and sustained weight loss with ESG and an excellent safety profile in both bariatric surgery and gastroenterology practices, supporting the scalability of the procedure across practices in a multidisciplinary setting.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

The First Systematic Gastroscopy Training Program for Surgeons in Korea

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic evaluation of the stomach is essential for preoperative planning and post-surgical surveillance for various diseases of the stomach, including malignancy. The gastroscopy education program for surgeons is currently in its infancy and is not systematically organized in Korea. This study aimed to introduce the first systematic gastroscopy education program for surgeons in Korea.

METHODS

The gastroscopy education program entitled "Gastroscopy School for Surgeons (GSS)" comprised of theoretical education, dry lab hands-on training, and clinical practice. All participants were beginners without any gastroscopy experience. Clinical practice started after the completion of the theoretical and dry lab training. The gastroscopy practices utilized simple luminal observation, biopsy, localization using clips or dye injection, and limited therapeutic gastroscopy. The educational performances and surveys from 33 participants were analyzed.

RESULTS

The participants consisted of surgical residents, general surgeons, gastrointestinal-specialized surgeons, and physicians. Participants performed a total of 2,272 gastroscopies, 2,008 of which were post-gastrectomy cases. Currently, of the 33 participants, 7 (21.2%) of the participants performed gastroscopy regularly, and 7 (21.2%) occasionally. According to the self-reported survey, one participant assessed their current gastroscopic technique to be at the expert level, and 25 (75.8%) at a proficient level. All participants considered gastroscopy education for surgeons to be necessary, and 28 (84.8%) stated that systematic education is not currently provided in Korea.

CONCLUSION

We introduced the first systematic gastroscopy education program for surgeons in Korea, namely the GSS, which is practical and meets clinical needs. More training centers are needed to expand gastroscopy training among Korean surgeons.

Democratizing Flexible Endoscopy Training: Noninferiority Randomized Trial Comparing a Box-Trainer vs a Virtual Reality Simulator to Prepare for the Fundamental of Endoscopic Surgery Exam

BACKGROUND

A considerable number of surgical residents fail the mandated endoscopy exam despite having completed the required clinical cases. Low-cost endoscopy box trainers (BTs) could democratize training; however, their effectiveness has never been compared with higher-cost virtual reality simulators (VRSs).

STUDY DESIGN

In this randomized noninferiority trial, endoscopy novices trained either on the VRS used in the Fundamental of Endoscopic Surgery manual skills (FESms) exam or a validated BT-the Basic Endoscopic Skills Training (BEST) box. Trainees were tested at fixed timepoints on the FESms and on standardized ex vivo models. The primary endpoint was FESms improvement at 1 week. Secondary endpoints were FESms improvement at 2 weeks, FESms pass rates, ex vivo tests performance, and trainees' feedback.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven trainees completed the study. VRS and BT trainees showed comparable FESms improvements (25.16 ± 14.29 vs 25.58 ± 11.75 FESms points, respectively; p = 0.89), FESms pass rates (76.32% vs 61.54%, respectively; p = 0.16) and total ex vivo tasks completion times (365.76 ± 237.56 vs 322.68 ± 186.04 seconds, respectively; p = 0.55) after 1 week. Performances were comparable also after 2 weeks of training, but FESms pass rates increased significantly only in the first week. Trainees were significantly more satisfied with the BT platform (3.97 ± 1.20 vs 4.81 ± 0.40 points on a 5-point Likert scale for the VRS and the BT, respectively; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Simulation-based training is an effective means to develop competency in endoscopy, especially at the beginning of the learning curve. Low-cost BTs like the BEST box compare well with high-tech VRSs and could help democratize endoscopy training.

Focused Bedside Ultrasound Training Program for Surgical Residents in the Intensive Care Unit of Tertiary hospital

Bedside ultrasound has become one of the most important noninvasive and readily available diagnostic tools for critically ill patients. However, the current ultrasound training program for surgical residents is not standardized and is mostly unavailable to all surgical residents equally. Herein, we evaluated the effectiveness of the new training program in bedside ultrasound for surgical residents. Postgraduate residents (years 1 to 4) from the department of general surgery in a tertiary hospital attended the newly designed, 8-week ultrasound training course at the surgical intensive care unit. Didactic and experimental lectures about basic ultrasound physics and machine usage were delivered, followed by daily hands-on training to actual patients. Each participant documented their ultrasound findings and completed a self-assessment survey of ultrasound skills using the Likert scale. A total of 44 residents were enrolled, and only 36.4% of them were previously exposed to bedside ultrasound experience. Following the completion of the training course, the proficiency levels and the objective structured assessment of ultrasound skill scores showed significant improvement in every element (P < 0.001). The mean differences in pre- and post-course scores between post-graduate years and post hoc analysis revealed that the post-graduate year 2 group showed a higher improvement in most elements. Whether or not residents had previous experience with ultrasound, the significant improvement was seen in post-course scores. The knowledge and confidence of surgical residents in bedside ultrasound could be improved after our short training curriculum. Such education should be encouraged for all surgical residents to enhance their competency in performing bedside ultrasounds and use in managing critically ill patients.

A curriculum to democratize and standardize flexible endoscopy fundamental knowledge and skills: a critical review of the first 5 years of a surgical endoscopy university diploma

BACKGROUND

As flexible endoscopy offers many advantages to patients, access to training should be aggressively encouraged. In 2014, the IRCAD-IHU-Strasbourg launched a year-long university diploma using advanced education methods to offer surgeons and gastroenterologists high-quality, personalized training in flexible endoscopy. This paper describes and critically reviews the first 5 years of the University Diploma in Surgical Endoscopy (UDSE).

METHODS

The UDSE aims to progressively transmit theoretical knowledge, clinical judgment, and practical skills on basic and advanced flexible endoscopy. The 300-h year-long curriculum is composed of 100 h of online lectures with tests, 150 h of clinical rotations and 50 h of hands-on sessions. The hands-on training is delivered through validated mechanical simulators, virtual reality simulators, and specifically designed ex vivo and in vivo animal models. Participants' demographics, training, and clinical experience were recorded. Trainees' evaluations of each online lecture, hands-on training, and clinical rotations were assessed using a Likert scale from 1 (not satisfactory) to 5 (outstanding). Trainees' skill progression was evaluated using the Global Assessment of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Skills (GAGES) proficiency test. Finally, clinical uptake was surveyed.

RESULTS

162 (79.01% males) trainees from 38 countries enrolled and successfully completed the first 5 courses. The vast majority of the trainees were surgeons and 19.14% were gastroenterologist. Sixty-nine (42.59%) participants were residents and 97 (56.79%) had no prior experience in flexible endoscopy. The online lectures, on-site sessions, and clinical rotations were highly appreciated receiving an overall average score of 4.33/5, 4.56/5, 4.43/5, respectively. Trainees' endoscopic skills improved significantly (16.68 vs. 20.53 GAGES scores; p = 0.016). At an average of 18.83 months following the course, 31 alumni (77.50% of repliers) started to use a flexible endoscope in their practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Over its 5-year evolution, the UDSE has proven to be a valid means to ease access to the fundamental knowledge, practical skills, and clinical judgment necessary to achieve proficiency in surgical endoscopy.

The Fundamentals of Endoscopic Surgery (FES) skills test: factors associated with first-attempt scores and pass rate

BACKGROUND

The Fundamentals of Endoscopic Surgery (FES) program became required for American Board of Surgery certification as part of the Flexible Endoscopy Curriculum (FEC) for residents graduating in 2018. This study expands prior psychometric investigation of the FES skills test.

METHODS

We analyzed de-identified first-attempt skills test scores and self-reported demographic characteristics of 2023 general surgery residents who were required to pass FES.

RESULTS

The overall pass rate was 83%. "Loop Reduction" was the most difficult sub-task. Subtasks related to one another only modestly (Spearman's ρ ranging from 0.11 to 0.42; coefficient α = .55). Both upper and lower endoscopic procedural experience had modest positive association with scores (ρ = 0.14 and 0.15) and passing. Examinees who tested on the GI Mentor Express simulator had lower total scores and a lower pass rate than those tested on the GI Mentor II (pass rates = 73% vs. 85%). Removing an Express-specific scoring rule that had been applied eliminated these differences. Gender, glove size, and height were closely related. Women scored lower than men (408- vs. 489-point averages) and had a lower first-attempt pass rate (71% vs. 92%). Glove size correlated positively with score (ρ = 0.31) and pass rate. Finally, height correlated positively with score (r = 0.27) and pass rate. Statistically controlling for glove size and height did not eliminate gender differences, with men still having 3.2 times greater odds of passing.

CONCLUSIONS

FES skills test scores show both consistencies with the assessment's validity argument and several remarkable findings. Subtasks reflect distinct skills, so passing standards should perhaps be set for each subtask. The Express simulator-specific scoring penalty should be removed. Differences seen by gender are concerning. We argue those differences do not reflect measurement bias, but rather highlight equity concerns in surgical technology, training, and practice.

Senior General Surgery Resident Confidence in Performing Abdominal Wall Hernia Repairs

BACKGROUND

It is expected that graduating general surgery residents be confident in performing common abdominal wall hernia repairs. The objective of our study was to assess the confidence of senior surgical residents in these procedures and to identify factors that correlate with confidence.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional survey of PGY-4 and PGY-5 general surgery residents at ACGME-accredited programs in the United States in the spring of 2019. Respondents rated their confidence level in 12 hernia procedures on a Likert scale from 1 (not confident) to 5 (extremely confident). Respondents were classified as "Not Confident" (Not Confident, Minimally Confident, Neutral responses) or "Confident" (Confident, Extremely Confident responses). Resident characteristics, program characteristics, and operative experience were collected, and we calculated the area under the curve to screen which factors discriminated between those confident versus not. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to estimate prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to identify which factors were most predictive.

RESULTS

A total of 93 surveys were completed. Respondents reported low confidence rates (25%-60%) in the following hernia repairs: minimally invasive (MIS) inguinal, femoral, tissue (nonmesh) inguinal, pediatric inguinal, and abdominal wall reconstruction. High confidence rates (>80%) were reported for open umbilical, open ventral, and MIS ventral hernia repairs. For MIS inguinal hernia repair, PGY-5 level was associated with a twofold increase in confidence (PR = 2.01; 95% CI = 1.34-3.30), and dedicated research years were associated with low confidence (PR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.43-1.04). In general, higher operative volumes of a specific repair were associated with increased confidence in that procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Senior surgical residents reported low confidence in performing a variety of essential hernia repairs (particularly MIS inguinal, femoral, and tissue inguinal). Addressing factors associated with low confidence may help increase resident confidence.

Colonoscopy education for surgical residents in Korea: a national survey of Korean Surgical Skill Study Group

Purpose

A standardized colonoscopy training program surgical residents is still unestablished. The aim of this study was to assess the current status of colonoscopy training for surgical residents and collect the opinions on the direction for future colonoscopy education.

Methods

A questionnaire survey containing 24 items was conducted by sending an email to 310 colorectal surgeons in 84 training hospitals across the country.

Results

One hundred fifteen staff surgeons (115 of 310, 37%) of 84 institutions returned fully completed questionnaires. Most surgeons were working at tertiary hospitals with more than 5 years of clinical experience. About half of the responding surgeons answered that they perform colonoscopy in clinical practice and the main purpose of colonoscopy was follow-up after colorectal resection. Only 9 of 84 hospitals (10.7%) had a regular program on colonoscopy training for surgical residents. Most of colonoscopy education was conducted irregularly in a form of staff lecture, conferences or hands-on workshops. According to the future directions, 72 of 115 surgeons (62.6%) answered judging competency in colonoscopy should be needed for professional qualification of the surgeon. About 50 cases of colonoscopy seem appropriate during the 4-year-training of surgical residency, especially during the third- and fourth-year.

Conclusion

This survey shows colonoscopy education for surgical residents is still insufficient in Korea and that most surgeons feel that regular colonoscopy training is needed during the surgical residency period. There needs to be efforts to standardize the education program as well as various institutional and academic societal supports to achieve this goal.

Accredited residents perform colonoscopy to the same high standards as consultants

BACKGROUND

Endoscopy remains a critical component of General Surgery and Gastroenterology training. Whilst residents need to gain experience, the quality of endoscopy which patients receive cannot be compromised. We conducted this study to compare quality indicators between consultants and residents with regards to colonoscopy.

METHODS

A review of colonoscopies from a prospectively collected database was performed from September 2011 to February 2016. Quality indicators such as caecum intubation rate, adenoma detection rate, adherence to a 6-min withdrawal rule, mean number of polyps detected per colonoscope, and complications were collected and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

In total, out of 25,749 colonoscopies that were performed, 14,168 (55.0%) were performed by Consultants. Consultants achieved a better caecum intubation rate compared with residents (96.0% vs 94.9%, p < 0.001), and were more compliant to the 6-min withdrawal rule (74.7% vs 68.6%, p < 0.001). There were, however, no statistically significant differences in the adenoma detection rate (33.5% vs 34.5%, p = 0.098). Bleeding was a rare complication that was encountered more frequently in colonoscopies performed by consultants than for residents (0.002% vs 0.00008%, p < 0.001). There were only three (%) perforations in the entire series, and all were from colonoscopies performed by Consultants.

CONCLUSION

Given the proper training, residents are able to perform colonoscopy with the same level of competence as consultants. Whilst colonoscopic related complications are often tied to the difficulty of the procedures, the adherence to the 6-min withdrawal rule must be reinforced and continually educated to both residents and consultants.