Literature DB >> 24210655

The Welsh Institute for Minimal Access Therapy colonoscopy suitcase has construct and concurrent validity for colonoscopic polypectomy skills training: a prospective, cross-sectional study.

James Ansell1, Joanna J Hurley2, James Horwood3, Chantelle Rizan4, Konstantinos Arnaoutakis1, Stuart Goddard1, Neil Warren1, Jared Torkington3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Welsh Institute for Minimal Access Therapy (WIMAT) colonoscopy suitcase is an ex vivo porcine simulator for polypectomy training.
OBJECTIVE: To establish whether this model has construct and concurrent validity.
DESIGN: Prospective, cross-sectional study.
SETTING: Endoscopic training center. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty novice (N), 20 intermediate (I), 20 advanced (Ad), and 20 expert (E) colonoscopists. INTERVENTION: A simulated polypectomy task aimed at removing 2 polyps; A (simple), B (complex). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Two accredited colonoscopists, blinded to group allocation, scored performances according to Direct Observation of Polypectomy Skills (DOPyS) assessment parameters. Group performances were compared. Real-life DOPyS scores were correlated to simulator DOPyS results.
RESULTS: Median overall DOPyS scores for novices were 1.00 (1.00-1.87) for A and 0.50 (0.00-1.00) for B (A vs B; P < .01). Intermediates scored 2.50 (2.00-2.88) for A and 2.00 (1.13-2.50) for B (A vs B; P = .03). The advanced group scored 3.00 (2.50-3.50) for A and 2.50 (2.00-3.00) for B (A vs B; P = .01). Experts scored 3.00 (3.00-3.88) for A and 3.00 (2.50-3.50) for B (A vs B; P = .47). Intergroup comparisons for A were, N vs I; P < .01, N vs Ad; P < .01, N vs E; P < .01, I vs Ad; P < .01, I vs E; P < .01, and Ad vs E; P = .46. Intergroup comparisons for B were, N vs I; P < .01, N vs Ad; P < .01, N vs E; P < .01, I vs Ad; P = .03, I vs E; P <.01, and Ad vs E; P = .06. There was no difference between real-life DOPyS scores and simulator scores (0.07). LIMITATIONS: The model does not have inbuilt assessment parameters.
CONCLUSION: This simulator demonstrates construct and concurrent validity for colon polypectomy training.
Copyright © 2014 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24210655     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.08.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  5 in total

1.  Design and validation of a cost-effective physical endoscopic simulator for fundamentals of endoscopic surgery training.

Authors:  Neil King; Anastasia Kunac; Erik Johnsen; Gregory Gallina; Aziz M Merchant
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Training in Endoscopy.

Authors:  Keith Siau; Neil D Hawkes; Paul Dunckley
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-09

3.  National survey of UK endoscopists showing variation in diathermy practice for colonic polypectomy: a JAG perspective.

Authors:  Keith Siau; Aravinth Murugananthan; Paul Dunckley; Geoffrey V Smith; Siwan Thomas-Gibson
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-01-09

4.  Polypectomy skills of gastroenterology fellows: can we improve them?

Authors:  Sascha C van Doorn; Barbara A J Bastiaansen; Siwan Thomas-Gibson; Paul Fockens; Evelien Dekker
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2016-01-08

Review 5.  Advances, problems, and complications of polypectomy.

Authors:  Andrea Anderloni; Manol Jovani; Cesare Hassan; Alessandro Repici
Journal:  Clin Exp Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-08-30
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.