• Gastrointest. Endosc. · Nov 2012

    Poor discriminatory function for endoscopic skills on a computer-based simulator.

    • Ryan A McConnell, Stephen Kim, Nuzhat A Ahmad, Gary W Falk, Kimberly A Forde, Gregory G Ginsberg, David L Jaffe, George A Makar, William B Long, Kashyap V Panganamamula, and Michael L Kochman.
    • Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
    • Gastrointest. Endosc. 2012 Nov 1; 76 (5): 993-1002.

    BackgroundComputer-based endoscopy simulators may enable trainees to learn and develop technical skills before performing on patients. Simulators require validation as adequate models of live endoscopy before being used for training or assessment purposes.ObjectiveTo evaluate content and criterion validity of the CAE EndoscopyVR Simulator colonoscopy and EGD modules as predictors of clinical endoscopic skills.DesignProspective, observational, non-randomized, parallel cohort study.SettingSingle academic center with accredited gastroenterology training program.ParticipantsFive novice first-year gastroenterology fellows and 6 expert gastroenterology attending physicians.InterventionParticipants performed 18 simulated colonoscopies and 6 simulated EGDs. The simulator recorded objective performance parameters. Participants then completed feedback surveys.Main Outcome MeasurementsThe 57 objective performance parameters measured by the endoscopy simulator were compared between the two study groups. Novice and expert survey responses were analyzed.ResultsSignificant differences between novice and expert performance were detected in only 19 of 57 (33%) performance metrics. Eight of these 19 (42%) were time-related metrics, such as total procedure time, time to anatomic landmarks, and time spent in contact with GI mucosa. Of 49 non-time related measures, the few additional statistically significant differences between novices and experts involved air insufflation, sedation management, endoscope force, and patient comfort. These findings are of uncertain clinical significance. Survey data found multiple aspects of the simulation to be unrealistic compared with human endoscopy.LimitationsSmall sample size.ConclusionThe CAE EndoscopyVR Simulator displays poor content and criterion validity and is thereby incapable of predicting skill during in vivo endoscopy.Copyright © 2012 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…