Literature DB >> 24976441

Cumulative sum: a proficiency metric for basic endoscopic training.

Yinin Hu1, Joshua S Jolissaint2, Adriana Ramirez1, Ryan Gordon2, Zequan Yang1, Robert G Sawyer3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: As work hour restrictions increasingly limit some operative experiences, personalized evaluative methods are needed. We prospectively assessed the value of cumulative sum (Cusum) to measure proficiency with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) among surgical trainees.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nine postgraduate year 1 surgery residents each underwent a 1-month rotation dedicated to endoscopy. Procedure durations for all PEG insertions were recorded prospectively. Criteria for task failure included need for attending takeover or procedure duration >10 min. Cusum parameters were defined a priori, with acceptable and unacceptable failure rates of 5% and 15%, respectively. Concurrently, expert endoscopists blinded to Cusum results evaluated trainee proficiency weekly using a multicategory, five-point Likert-scale survey.
RESULTS: Nine surgical residents performed an average of 21 PEGs each. Expert evaluations and Cusum analyses identified eight and seven participants who attained proficiency after a median of 11.5 and 12 cases, respectively. For four of the residents who achieved proficiency by Cusum criteria, eventual relapses to inadequate performance were identified. These relapses were not detected by expert evaluation. Six participants who attained proficiency by both metrics performed a combined 32 superfluous cases, which could have been redistributed to poor-performing trainees.
CONCLUSIONS: Although lacking the granular insight of expert evaluations, Cusum analysis is more sensitive to relapses of subproficient performance. Adding Cusum analysis to expert evaluations can provide longitudinal, formative feedback and promote efficient redistribution of operative experiences.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cumulative sum; Evaluation; Learning curve; Percutaneous gastrostomy; Resident training; Upper endoscopy

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24976441      PMCID: PMC4188705          DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2014.05.056

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Surg Res        ISSN: 0022-4804            Impact factor:   2.192


  25 in total

1.  The use of the Cusum technique in the assessment of trainee competence in new procedures.

Authors:  S Bolsin; M Colson
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.038

2.  Principles of privileging and credentialing for endoscopy and colonoscopy.

Authors:  S D Wexner; G M Eisen; C Simmang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2002-01-17       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Computer simulator training enhances the competency of gastroenterology fellows at colonoscopy: results of a pilot study.

Authors:  Robert E Sedlack; Joseph C Kolars
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 10.864

4.  Strategies for training in diagnostic upper endoscopy: a prospective, randomized trial.

Authors:  Anke Ende; Yurdaguel Zopf; Peter Konturek; Andreas Naegel; Eckhart G Hahn; Kai Matthes; Juergen Maiss
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 5.  Overview of methods for flexible endoscopic training and description of a simple explant model.

Authors:  M S Phillips; J M Marks
Journal:  Asian J Endosc Surg       Date:  2011-03-17

6.  Global Assessment of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Skills (GAGES): a valid measurement tool for technical skills in flexible endoscopy.

Authors:  Melina C Vassiliou; Pepa A Kaneva; Benjamin K Poulose; Brian J Dunkin; Jeffrey M Marks; Riadh Sadik; Gideon Sroka; Mehran Anvari; Klaus Thaler; Gina L Adrales; Jeffrey W Hazey; Jenifer R Lightdale; Vic Velanovich; Lee L Swanstrom; John D Mellinger; Gerald M Fried
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-01-29       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Cusum analysis is a useful tool to assess resident proficiency at insertion of labour epidurals.

Authors:  Viren N Naik; Isabella Devito; Stephen H Halpern
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2003 Aug-Sep       Impact factor: 5.063

8.  ASGE's assessment of competency in endoscopy evaluation tools for colonoscopy and EGD.

Authors:  Robert E Sedlack; Walter J Coyle; Keith L Obstein; Mohammad A Al-Haddad; Gennadiy Bakis; Jennifer A Christie; Raquel E Davila; Barry DeGregorio; Christoper J DiMaio; Brintha K Enestvedt; Jennifer Jorgensen; Daniel K Mullady; Liz Rajan
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-11-14       Impact factor: 9.427

9.  Fundamentals of endoscopic surgery: creation and validation of the hands-on test.

Authors:  Melina C Vassiliou; Brian J Dunkin; Gerald M Fried; John D Mellinger; Thadeus Trus; Pepa Kaneva; Calvin Lyons; James R Korndorffer; Michael Ujiki; Vic Velanovich; Michael L Kochman; Shawn Tsuda; Jose Martinez; Daniel J Scott; Gary Korus; Adrian Park; Jeffrey M Marks
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Assessing resident performance and training of colonoscopy in a general surgery training program.

Authors:  William W Hope; W Borden Hooks; S Nicole Kilbourne; Ashley Adams; Cyrus A Kotwall; Thomas V Clancy
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  7 in total

1.  The learning curve for robotic distal pancreatectomy: an analysis of outcomes of the first 100 consecutive cases at a high-volume pancreatic centre.

Authors:  Murtaza Shakir; Brian A Boone; Patricio M Polanco; Mazen S Zenati; Melissa E Hogg; Allan Tsung; Haroon A Choudry; A James Moser; David L Bartlett; Herbert J Zeh; Amer H Zureikat
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 3.647

2.  Observations on Surgeons' Case Selection, Morbidity, and Mortality Following Board Certification.

Authors:  Christopher A Guidry; Timothy E Newhook; Florence E Turrentine; Min-Woong Sohn; Robert G Sawyer; R Scott Jones
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Long-Term Skills Retention Following a Randomized Prospective Trial on Adaptive Procedural Training.

Authors:  Adriana G Ramirez; Yinin Hu; Helen Kim; Sara K Rasmussen
Journal:  J Surg Educ       Date:  2018-05-24       Impact factor: 2.891

4.  Vessel ligation training via an adaptive simulation curriculum.

Authors:  Yinin Hu; Robyn N Goodrich; Ivy A Le; Kendall D Brooks; Robert G Sawyer; Philip W Smith; Anneke T Schroen; Sara K Rasmussen
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2015-01-29       Impact factor: 2.192

Review 5.  Robotic pancreas surgery: an overview of history and update on technique, outcomes, and financials.

Authors:  Hussein H Khachfe; Joseph R Habib; Salem Al Harthi; Amal Suhool; Ali H Hallal; Faek R Jamali
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-08-06

6.  Learning curves for robotic pancreatic surgery-from distal pancreatectomy to pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Bor-Uei Shyr; Shih-Chin Chen; Yi-Ming Shyr; Shin-E Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 1.889

7.  Learning curve of laparoscopic Kasai portoenterostomy for biliary atresia: report of 100 cases.

Authors:  Yi Ji; Kaiying Yang; Xuepeng Zhang; Siyuan Chen; Zhicheng Xu
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 2.102

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.