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

被引:15
作者
McConnell, Ryan A. [1 ]
Kim, Stephen [1 ]
Ahmad, Nuzhat A. [1 ]
Falk, Gary W. [1 ]
Forde, Kimberly A. [1 ]
Ginsberg, Gregory G. [1 ]
Jaffe, David L. [1 ]
Makar, George A. [1 ]
Long, William B. [1 ]
Panganamamula, Kashyap V. [1 ]
Kochman, Michael L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Penn Hlth Syst, Dept Med, Div Gastroenterol, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
关键词
UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY; VIRTUAL-REALITY; GASTROENTEROLOGY FELLOWS; COLONOSCOPY SIMULATION; TRAINING SYSTEM; VALIDATION; MODEL; PERFORMANCE; COMPETENCE; VALIDITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.gie.2012.07.024
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Computer-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. Objective: To evaluate content and criterion validity of the CAE EndoscopyVR Simulator colonoscopy and EGD modules as predictors of clinical endoscopic skills. Design: Prospective, observational, non-randomized, parallel cohort study. Setting: Single academic center with accredited gastroenterology training program. Participants: Five novice first-year gastroenterology fellows and 6 expert gastroenterology attending physicians. Intervention: Participants performed 18 simulated colonoscopies and 6 simulated EGDs. The simulator recorded objective performance parameters. Participants then completed feedback surveys. Main Outcome Measurements: The 57 objective performance parameters measured by the endoscopy simulator were compared between the two study groups. Novice and expert survey responses were analyzed. Results: Significant 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. Limitations: Small sample size. Conclusion: The CAE EndoscopyVR Simulator displays poor content and criterion validity and is thereby incapable of predicting skill during in vivo endoscopy. (Gastrointest Endosc 2012;76:993-1002.)
引用
收藏
页码:993 / 1002
页数:10
相关论文
共 54 条
  • [51] Proficiency-Based Laparoscopic and Endoscopic Training With Virtual Reality, Simulators: A Comparison of Proctored and Independent Approaches
    Snyder, Christopher W.
    Vandromme, Marianne J.
    Tyra, Sharon L.
    Hawn, Mary T.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SURGICAL EDUCATION, 2009, 66 (04) : 201 - 207
  • [52] Validation of the X-Vision ERCP Training System and Technical Challenges During Early Training of Sphincterotomy
    Von Delius, Stefan
    Thies, Philipp
    Meining, Alexander
    Wagenpfeil, Stefan
    Burian, Maria
    Huber, Wolfgang
    Weidenbach, Hans
    Ebert, Matthias P.
    Neu, Bruno
    Ludwig, Leopold
    Almeida, John
    Prinz, Christian
    Schmid, Roland M.
    Frimberger, Eckart
    [J]. CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2009, 7 (04) : 389 - 396
  • [53] Waye J D, 1996, Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am, V6, P343
  • [54] Evaluation of the EASIE-R simulator for the training of basic and advanced EUS
    Yusuf, Tony E.
    Matthes, Kai
    Lee, Young
    Goodman, Adam J.
    Robbins, David H.
    Stavropoulos, Stavros
    Gress, Frank G.
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2009, 69 (02) : S264 - S264