Colonoscopy core curriculum

Sedlack, Robert E.; Shami, Vanessa M.; Adler, Douglas G.; Coyle, Walter; DeGregorio, Barry; Dua, Kulwinder S.; DiMaio, Christopher J.; Lee, Linda; McHenry, Lee; Pais, Shireen; Rajan, Elizabeth; Faulx, Ashley L.

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2012.04.438

Cited by 57 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although some countries have recently implemented elements of structured basic colonoscopy training,63 64 most have not. Importantly, colonoscopy training has traditionally followed an apprenticeship model,65 66 rarely using principles of adult education67 68 or teaching aids69 70 to facilitate skills acquisition.…”

Section: Colonoscopy Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The framework for knowledge content in colonoscopy training has remained unchanged for years63 73 and includes the following items: preprocedure, insertion, withdrawal and diagnosis, treatment, postprocedure and complications (see table 2). Nonetheless, the quality and quantity of knowledge have increased dramatically, especially in terms of bowel preparation methods, lesion recognition, lesion removal and surveillance.…”

Section: Colonoscopy Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Didactic lectures, core reading requirements and small group discussions were proposed63 78 and are widely used. Modern teaching tools, like educational DVDs (available from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy) and e-learning, may be more widely applied in the future 79.…”

Section: Colonoscopy Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness, training and quality assurance of colonoscopy screening for colorectal cancer

Robertson

Kaminski

Bretthauer

2015

Gut

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Screening for colorectal cancer has been proven to be effective in reducing colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. While the precise benefit of screening exclusively by colonoscopy is not yet known, unarguably, the exam is central to the success of any screening programme. The test affords the opportunity to detect and resect neoplasia across the entire large bowel and is the definitive examination when other screening tests are positive. However, colonoscopy is invasive and often requires sedation as well as extensive bowel preparation, all of which puts the patient at risk. Furthermore, the test can technically be demanding and, unarguably, there is variation in how it is performed. This variation in performance has now been definitively linked to important outcome measures. For example, interval cancers are more common in low adenoma detectors as compared with high adenoma detectors. This review outlines the most current thinking regarding the effectiveness of colonoscopy as a screening tool. It also outlines key concepts to optimise its performance through robust quality assurance programmes and high-quality training.

show abstract

Section: Colonoscopy Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Colonoscopy Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Colonoscopy Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effectiveness, training and quality assurance of colonoscopy screening for colorectal cancer

Robertson

Kaminski

Bretthauer

2015

Gut

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the common nature of these procedures, there is no standard methodology for the training of endoscopists, or for the objective determination of when a trainee has met important thresholds or attained technical competence. Furthermore, there is no objective tool to determine when a trainee is sufficiently familiar with the endoscope and endoscopic equipment to begin clinical procedures [6]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…At a recent national meeting of program directors in General Surgery, an answer to the question “How should we be teaching endoscopy?” was not forthcoming. Although there exist excellent syllabuses [6], these describe very well the content that the learner is expected to learn during the fellowship, without describing how, exactly, the procedural teaching is to take place [7-9]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A classification of the verbal methods currently used to teach endoscopy

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAs endoscopy does not lend itself well to assisting or exposure by the teacher, most of the teaching is, by necessity, done verbally.MethodsThe verbal teaching occurring during 19 colonoscopies and 14 gastroscopies was recorded by dictaphone and later transcribed. The resultant 53-page transcript was then analyzed using the Grounded Theory method. Teaching was compared between learners with less than one month versus more than one month of training and between teaching of colonoscopy versus gastroscopy.ResultsThe process of iterative review and repeated testing yielded 6 types of verbal teaching: demonstration by the teacher, motor instructions, broad tips/tricks/pointers, verbal feedback, questioning, and non-procedural information. Inter-rater agreement was excellent (Fleiss’s kappa = 0.76) between resident (DM), the non-medical educator (MP), and the medical teacher (MM). Overall, there was less non-procedural teaching (6.7% vs 23.7%, p = 0.01) and a trend towards more teaching moments per case (13.2 vs 7.9, p = 0.07) in the first month of the rotation compared to the later months. A greater proportion of the teaching for colonoscopy involved demonstration (13.7% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.040) and tips/tricks/pointers (26.6% vs. 12.4%, p = 0.012) compared to gastroscopy.ConclusionsWe describe a means of categorizing verbal teaching in endoscopy that is simple and shows strong inter-rater agreement that will serve as a starting point for further studies aiming to improve how endoscopy is taught.

show abstract

Colonoscopy core curriculum

Cited by 57 publications

References 46 publications

Effectiveness, training and quality assurance of colonoscopy screening for colorectal cancer

Effectiveness, training and quality assurance of colonoscopy screening for colorectal cancer

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

A classification of the verbal methods currently used to teach endoscopy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About