Rajesh N Keswani1, Phyllis Malpas2, Sheryl E Lynch3, Gregory A Coté2. 1. Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 676 N. St. Clair, Suite 1400, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA. raj-keswani@northwestern.edu. 2. Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 3. Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data on ERCP nurses and associate (ERCP-NA) training and comfort are lacking. Healthcare industry representative (HCIR) influence may be greater in low-volume units (LVUs) due to decreased procedure and device familiarity. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare ERCP-NA training, safety, and HCIR relationships between LVU and high-volume unit (HVU) ERCP facilities. METHODS: We conducted an electronic survey of all Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates (SGNA) members assessing: (1) demographics and procedure volume, (2) ERCP training and radiation safety, and (3) HCIR interactions. Responses were stratified by ERCP volume. RESULTS: Among 832 SGNA member respondents (median age 55), 615 (74%) worked as an ERCP-NA; 41% derived from LVUs. The majority of ERCP-NAs, irrespective of unit volume, had observed <50 ERCPs before starting. Except for lead glasses, the majority (>80%) adhered to basic radiation safety, irrespective of unit volume. LVUs were more likely than HVU ERCP-NAs to agree that HCIRs were requested for intra-procedure assistance (24 vs. 19%, p = 0.008), asked for input on the next choice of device (22 vs. 15%, p = 0.01), and assist in device usage (27 vs. 22%, p = 0.04). Irrespective of volume, 30% agreed that they were more likely to utilize a company's devices if that HCIR was present. CONCLUSIONS: ERCP-NA training before independent participation in ERCP is suboptimal. HCIRs are frequently requested for assistance during ERCPs, especially in LVUs. HCIR impact on ERCP outcomes and device utilization and whether enhanced ERCP-NA training will impact the role of HCIR, require further study.
BACKGROUND: Data on ERCP nurses and associate (ERCP-NA) training and comfort are lacking. Healthcare industry representative (HCIR) influence may be greater in low-volume units (LVUs) due to decreased procedure and device familiarity. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare ERCP-NA training, safety, and HCIR relationships between LVU and high-volume unit (HVU) ERCP facilities. METHODS: We conducted an electronic survey of all Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates (SGNA) members assessing: (1) demographics and procedure volume, (2) ERCP training and radiation safety, and (3) HCIR interactions. Responses were stratified by ERCP volume. RESULTS: Among 832 SGNA member respondents (median age 55), 615 (74%) worked as an ERCP-NA; 41% derived from LVUs. The majority of ERCP-NAs, irrespective of unit volume, had observed <50 ERCPs before starting. Except for lead glasses, the majority (>80%) adhered to basic radiation safety, irrespective of unit volume. LVUs were more likely than HVU ERCP-NAs to agree that HCIRs were requested for intra-procedure assistance (24 vs. 19%, p = 0.008), asked for input on the next choice of device (22 vs. 15%, p = 0.01), and assist in device usage (27 vs. 22%, p = 0.04). Irrespective of volume, 30% agreed that they were more likely to utilize a company's devices if that HCIR was present. CONCLUSIONS: ERCP-NA training before independent participation in ERCP is suboptimal. HCIRs are frequently requested for assistance during ERCPs, especially in LVUs. HCIR impact on ERCP outcomes and device utilization and whether enhanced ERCP-NA training will impact the role of HCIR, require further study.
Entities:
Keywords:
Device representatives; ERCP; Healthcare costs; Safety; Training
Authors: Nancy J O Birkmeyer; Jonathan F Finks; Caprice K Greenberg; Andrea McVeigh; Wayne J English; Arthur Carlin; Abdelkader Hawasli; David Share; John D Birkmeyer Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Linda H Aiken; Walter Sermeus; Koen Van den Heede; Douglas M Sloane; Reinhard Busse; Martin McKee; Luk Bruyneel; Anne Marie Rafferty; Peter Griffiths; Maria Teresa Moreno-Casbas; Carol Tishelman; Anne Scott; Tomasz Brzostek; Juha Kinnunen; Rene Schwendimann; Maud Heinen; Dimitris Zikos; Ingeborg Strømseng Sjetne; Herbert L Smith; Ann Kutney-Lee Journal: BMJ Date: 2012-03-20
Authors: Chunyan Peng; Paul J Nietert; Peter B Cotton; Daniel T Lackland; Joseph Romagnuolo Journal: BMC Gastroenterol Date: 2013-10-10 Impact factor: 3.067