Literature DB >> 12120177

Training and competence in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

M L Freeman1.   

Abstract

Patients, physicians, and health care providers want assurances that individuals performing gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures are competent and adequately credentialed. Definition of competence, however, has been an elusive goal. Most organizations, including professional societies and hospital privileging committees, have relied on estimated numbers of procedures performed or subjective assessment by a proctor as a surrogate marker of competence. Increasingly, objective assessment of performance is recognized as important in determining competence. Recent data have shown that learning curves for trainees are substantially more gradual than generally thought, and that the number of procedures required to achieve basic technical proficiency is much higher. Emerging data demonstrate that there is substantial variation in outcomes of endoscopy in clinical practice, related in part to the prior training, subspecialty background, ongoing case volume, and the individual endoscopist. Outcome variations correlate with both technical success and complications. Strategies for assessing competence in trainees and those in practice include numbers of procedures performed, subjective or objective assessment by a proctor, and self-assessment by the trainee. In the future, it is hoped that computers will be increasingly used to document outcomes of endoscopy in training and clinical practice as a part of routine report generation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 12120177

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Gastroenterol Disord        ISSN: 1533-001X


  7 in total

1.  Effect of MRCP introduction on ERCP practice: are there implications for service and training?

Authors:  J T Jenkins; G Glass; S Ballantyne; G M Fullarton
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  The frequency of early repeat tests after colonoscopy in elderly medicare recipients.

Authors:  Robert J Richards; Stephen Crystal
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2009-02-25       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  Video-Rated Performance Assessment of Simulated Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Validation of a Sleeve Gastrectomy Rating Scale.

Authors:  Ruth E Blackham; Jeffrey M Hamdorf
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2021-04-25       Impact factor: 4.129

4.  Guidelines for privileging and credentialing physicians in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Authors:  Jonathan Pearl; Erika Fellinger; Brian Dunkin; Eric Pauli; Thadeus Trus; Jeffrey Marks; Robert Fanelli; Michael Meara; Dimitrios Stefanidis; William Richardson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-06-28       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Outpatient colonoscopy by rural family physicians.

Authors:  Robert J Newman; David B Nichols; Doyle M Cummings
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.166

Review 6.  Referring patients to nurses: outcomes and evaluation of a nurse flexible sigmoidoscopy training program for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Mark J Dobrow; Mary Anne Cooper; Karen Gayman; Jason Pennington; Joanne Matthews; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 3.522

7.  Endoscopist-related factors contributing to high-quality colonoscopy: results of a Delphi survey.

Authors:  Vivian E Ekkelenkamp; Arjun D Koch; Jelle Haringsma; Ernst J Kuipers; Robert A De Man
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2014-01
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.