Endoscopic simulators

Desilets, David J.; Banerjee, Subhas; Barth, Bradley; Kaul, Vivek; Kethu, Sripathi R.; Pedrosa, Marcos; Pfau, Patrick R.; Tokar, Jeffrey L.; Varadarajulu, Shyam; Wang, Amy; Song, Louis–Michel Wong Kee; Rodriguez, Sarah A.

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.063

Cited by 101 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The GI-Bronch Mentor (Simbionix, Cleveland, Ohio) is similar to the AccuTouch system, but it includes the use of an authentic bronchoscope, the ability to insert the scope through the oral or nasal passageways, and can present a broader range of pathologies and clinical situations. 37 Less-expensive options include the PreOp Endoscopic Simulator (Immersion Corporation, San Jose, Calif) and the Computer-Based Bronchoscopy Simulator by Chen and colleagues, 38 both of which have many of the same capabilities as the AccuTouch (CAE Healthcare) and GI-Bronch Mentor (Simbionix). 39 The least expensive bronchoscopy simulators include the silicone CLA Broncho Boy (CLA, Coburg, Germany), Laederal Airway Management System (Laederal, Savanger, Norway), and AirSim (Trucorp, Belfast, Northern Ireland), which allow for rigid and flexible bronchoscopy using a sophisticated physical model.…”

Section: Bronchoscopymentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation in cardiothoracic surgical training: Where do we stand?

Trehan

Kemp

Yang

2014

The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Bronchoscopymentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation in cardiothoracic surgical training: Where do we stand?

Trehan

Kemp

Yang

2014

The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The simulation of practical procedures may be a valuable adjunct for medical training, particularly in the light of reduced working hours [28]. In colonoscopy, simulation is a growing field [3]. In recent years more research to support the use of ex vivo animal models has been published [4,29].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since then, there have been significant developments in the field. Simulators now exist with the capacity to teach several endoscopic procedures [3], including upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound. There are also different types of simulators available, ranging from bench models and ex vivo animal platforms to virtual reality (VR) trainers [4–7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The WIMAT colonoscopy suitcase model: a novel porcine polypectomy trainer

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim Simulation allows the acquisition of complex skills within a safe environment. Endoscopic polypectomy has a long learning curve. Our novel polypectomy simulator may be a useful adjunct for training. The aim of this study was to assess its content validity.Method The Welsh Institute for Minimal Access Therapy (WIMAT) endoscopy suitcase was designed to simulate colonic polypectomy. Participants from regional and national courses were recruited into the study. Each undertook a standardized simulated polypectomy and completed a seven-point Likert scale questionnaire examining its realism.Results In all, 17 participants completed the questionnaire: 15 (88.2%) gastroenterologists, one (5.9%) colorectal surgeon and one (5.9%) experienced endoscopic nurse specialist. Of the gastroenterologists, seven (46.7%) were consultants and eight (53.3%) were senior trainees or Post CCT (Certificate of Completion of Training) fellows. The mean number of real-life polypectomies performed by the cohort was 156 (95% CI 35-355). The highest scores were for 'mucosal realism' (median score 6.0, P = 0.001), 'endoscopic snare control' (median score 6.0, P = 0.001), 'handling the polyp' (median score 6.0, P = 0.001) and 'raising mucosa' (median score 6.0, P < 0.001). Of the 15 parameters examined only three were not statistically significant in favour of the simulator. These were 'anatomical realism of sessile polyps', 'resistance of scope movement' and 'paradoxical motion'. The overall score for the simulation was 6.0 (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the level of difficulty of the simulator compared with real life (median score 4.0, P = 0.559). ConclusionThe WIMAT colonoscopy suitcase model has excellent content validity for several parameters. This may have potential applications in medical training and assessment.

show abstract

“…Computer-based endoscopic simulators offers several potential advantages over traditional bedside teaching: (1) interactive video technology uses endoscopic images stored on a disk and could display them in real time in response to user’s endoscopic movements [9]; (2) computer graphics simulation uses computerized images displayed in response to the endoscopy being performed [10]; (3) no procedure-related errors to patients [11]. This systematic review was to determine whether the endoscopic skills of novices are improved after virtual endoscopy simulator training.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Virtual Endoscopy Simulator Training on Novices: A Systematic Review

Qiao

Bai

et al. 2014

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAdvances in virtual endoscopy simulators have paralleled an interest in medical simulation for gastrointestinal endoscopy training.ObjectiveThe primary objective was to determine whether the virtual endoscopy simulator training could improve the performance of novices.DesignA systematic review.SettingRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared virtual endoscopy simulator training with bedside teaching or any other intervention for novices were collected.PatientsNovice endoscopists.InterventionsThe PRISMA statement was followed during the course of the research. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ScienceDirect were searched (up to July 2013). Data extraction and assessment were independently performed.Main outcome measurementsIndependent procedure completion, total procedure time and required assistance.ResultsFifteen studies (n = 354) were eligible for inclusion: 9 studies designed for colonoscopy training, 6 for gastroscopy training. For gastroscopy training, procedure completed independently was reported in 87.7% of participants in simulator training group compared to 70.0% of participants in control group (1 study; 22 participants; RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.13–1.39; P<0.0001). For colonoscopy training, procedure completed independently was reported in 89.3% of participants in simulator training group compared to 88.9% of participants in control group (7 study; 163 participants; RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.88–1.37; P = 0.41; I 2 = 85%).LimitationsThe included studies are quite in-homogeneous with respect to training schedule and procedure.ConclusionsVirtual endoscopy simulator training might be effective for gastroscopy, but so far no data is available to support this for colonoscopy.

show abstract

Endoscopic simulators

Abstract: Live animal models are the most realistic endoscopy simulators. The haptic feedback is identical to human

Cited by 101 publications

References 36 publications

Simulation in cardiothoracic surgical training: Where do we stand?

Simulation in cardiothoracic surgical training: Where do we stand?

The WIMAT colonoscopy suitcase model: a novel porcine polypectomy trainer

The Effect of Virtual Endoscopy Simulator Training on Novices: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About