Naoto Tamai1, Hiroyuki Aihara2, Masayuki Kato2, Kimio Isshi2, Kazuki Sumiyama2. 1. Department of Endoscopy, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-8461, Japan. tamai-naoto@jikei.ac.jp. 2. Department of Endoscopy, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-8461, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Objective assessment of endoscopist competency is important. Recently, the endoscopic part-task training box (Thompson Endoscopic Skills Trainer [TEST]) was developed to assess endoscopist competency. We aimed to evaluate the ability of the TEST to assess competency during endoscopic procedures, especially endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). METHODS: Twenty-three physicians were included in this study. Correlations between TEST scores and the following factors were evaluated: years of endoscopic experience, number of esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs) performed, number of colonoscopies (CSs) performed, cecal intubation rate, number of gastric ESDs performed, gastric ESD procedure time/lesion size (min/mm2), and gastric ESD self-completion rate. Also, correlation coefficients between the number of gastric ESDs performed and each of gastric ESD procedure time/lesion size and gastric ESD self-completion rate were calculated. RESULTS: TEST scores showed strong correlations to different factors: years of experience in endoscopy: 0.957 (p < 0.01); number of EGDs: 0.947 (p < 0.01); number of CSs: 0.947, (p < 0.01); number of gastric ESDs: 0.924 (p < 0.01); gastric ESD procedure time/lesion size: - 0.9 (p < 0.01); self-completion rate of gastric ESDs: 0.857 (p < 0.005). The number of gastric ESDs performed was not more strongly correlated to procedure time of gastric ESDs or self-completion rate of gastric ESDs compared to TEST scores (- 0.824 (p < 0.01) and 0.704 (p < 0.05), respectively). TEST scores of endoscopists with a cecal intubation rate ≥ 90% were > 380, while the scores of physicians with a gastric ESD self-completion rate ≥ 90% were > 700. CONCLUSIONS: TEST score correlates with both basic and advanced endoscopic procedures. TEST is therefore a promising option for assessing endoscopist competency, and might be useful for providing threshold scores as competency markers for specific endoscopic procedures such as gastric ESD.
BACKGROUND: Objective assessment of endoscopist competency is important. Recently, the endoscopic part-task training box (Thompson Endoscopic Skills Trainer [TEST]) was developed to assess endoscopist competency. We aimed to evaluate the ability of the TEST to assess competency during endoscopic procedures, especially endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). METHODS: Twenty-three physicians were included in this study. Correlations between TEST scores and the following factors were evaluated: years of endoscopic experience, number of esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs) performed, number of colonoscopies (CSs) performed, cecal intubation rate, number of gastric ESDs performed, gastric ESD procedure time/lesion size (min/mm2), and gastric ESD self-completion rate. Also, correlation coefficients between the number of gastric ESDs performed and each of gastric ESD procedure time/lesion size and gastric ESD self-completion rate were calculated. RESULTS: TEST scores showed strong correlations to different factors: years of experience in endoscopy: 0.957 (p < 0.01); number of EGDs: 0.947 (p < 0.01); number of CSs: 0.947, (p < 0.01); number of gastric ESDs: 0.924 (p < 0.01); gastric ESD procedure time/lesion size: - 0.9 (p < 0.01); self-completion rate of gastric ESDs: 0.857 (p < 0.005). The number of gastric ESDs performed was not more strongly correlated to procedure time of gastric ESDs or self-completion rate of gastric ESDs compared to TEST scores (- 0.824 (p < 0.01) and 0.704 (p < 0.05), respectively). TEST scores of endoscopists with a cecal intubation rate ≥ 90% were > 380, while the scores of physicians with a gastric ESD self-completion rate ≥ 90% were > 700. CONCLUSIONS: TEST score correlates with both basic and advanced endoscopic procedures. TEST is therefore a promising option for assessing endoscopist competency, and might be useful for providing threshold scores as competency markers for specific endoscopic procedures such as gastric ESD.
Authors: Glenn M Eisen; Todd H Baron; Jason A Dominitz; Douglas O Faigel; Jay L Goldstein; John F Johanson; J Shawn Mallery; Hareth M Raddawi; John J Vargo; J Patrick Waring; Robert D Fanelli; Jo Wheeler-Harbough Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Jeffrey W Hazey; Jeffrey M Marks; John D Mellinger; Thadeus L Trus; Bipan Chand; Conor P Delaney; Brian J Dunkin; Robert D Fanelli; Gerald M Fried; Jose M Martinez; Jonathan P Pearl; Benjamin K Poulose; Lelan F Sillin; Melina C Vassiliou; W Scott Melvin Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-12-07 Impact factor: 4.584
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
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