Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver · 2012
Evaluation of hands-on training in colonoscopy: is a computer-based simulator useful?
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Elvevi Alessandra, Cantù Paolo, Maconi Giovanni, Conte Dario, Penagini Roberto
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The advantages of using a computer-based simulator during colonoscopy training are debated. We aimed to explore its usefulness in objectively measuring trainees' competence in colonoscopy.
METHODS: Twelve colonoscopy trainees (fully trained in upper GI endoscopy) were evaluated using a computer-based simulator (GI-Mentor, Symbionix) before and during hands-on training (i.e. after 60 colonoscopies); the controls were 15 experts (>90% of caecal intubation). Both trainees and experts performed two "screening" simulations (easy and difficult) in a randomised order, and the time to reach the caecum and withdrawal time was assessed.
RESULTS: The percentage of caecal intubation progressively increased during hands-on training. All of the trainees intubated the caecum during the easy and difficult simulations, both before and during hands-on training. The median time (interquartile range) to reach the caecum upon easy simulation was the only variable influenced by hands-on training: 2.7 min (2.1-3.2) before and 1.9 min (1.6-2) during training (p<0.01). Withdrawal time was ≥6 min in the case of five trainees before training, and three during hands-on training. Computer-based simulator performance did not correlate with hands-on training performance.
CONCLUSIONS: The computer-based simulator was not found to be useful in evaluating competence during hands-on training in colonoscopy.
METHODS: Twelve colonoscopy trainees (fully trained in upper GI endoscopy) were evaluated using a computer-based simulator (GI-Mentor, Symbionix) before and during hands-on training (i.e. after 60 colonoscopies); the controls were 15 experts (>90% of caecal intubation). Both trainees and experts performed two "screening" simulations (easy and difficult) in a randomised order, and the time to reach the caecum and withdrawal time was assessed.
RESULTS: The percentage of caecal intubation progressively increased during hands-on training. All of the trainees intubated the caecum during the easy and difficult simulations, both before and during hands-on training. The median time (interquartile range) to reach the caecum upon easy simulation was the only variable influenced by hands-on training: 2.7 min (2.1-3.2) before and 1.9 min (1.6-2) during training (p<0.01). Withdrawal time was ≥6 min in the case of five trainees before training, and three during hands-on training. Computer-based simulator performance did not correlate with hands-on training performance.
CONCLUSIONS: The computer-based simulator was not found to be useful in evaluating competence during hands-on training in colonoscopy.