Journal
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES
Volume 36, Issue 9, Pages 6767-6776Publisher
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08958-1
Keywords
Endoscopy; Colonoscopy; Virtual reality; Simulation; Proficiency-based training; Repetition-based training
Categories
Funding
- SAGES
- KARL STORZ Endoscopy-America
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This study evaluated the impact of virtual reality endoscopy training on live porcine endoscopy performance and compared the effectiveness of proficiency-based and repetition-based training curricula. The results showed that virtual reality training improved both upper and lower endoscopy performance and manual skills. The type of training curriculum did not significantly affect exam performance, but proficiency-based training was more time-effective and provided a structured approach to preparation.
Background Low first-time pass rates of the Fundamentals of Endoscopic Surgery (FES) exam stimulated development of virtual reality (VR) simulation curricula for test preparation. This study evaluates the transfer of VR endoscopy training to live porcine endoscopy performance and compares the relative effectiveness of a proficiency-based vs repetition-based VR training curriculum. Methods Novice endoscopists completed pretesting including the FES manual skills examination and Global Assessment of GI Endoscopic Skills (GAGES) assessment of porcine upper and lower endoscopy. Participants were randomly assigned one of two curricula: proficiency-based or repetition-based. Following curriculum completion, participants post-tested via repeat FES examination and GAGES porcine endoscopy assessments. The two cohorts pre-to-post-test differences were compared using ANCOVA. Results Twenty-two residents completed the curricula. There were no differences in demographics or clinical endoscopy experience between the groups. The repetition group spent significantly more time on the simulator (repetition: 242.2 min, SD 48.6) compared to the proficiency group (proficiency: 170.0 min, SD 66.3; p = 0.013). There was a significant improvement in porcine endoscopy (pre: 10.6, SD 2.8, post: 16.6, SD 3.4; p < 0.001) and colonoscopy (pre: 10.4, SD 2.7, post: 16.4, SD 4.2; p < 0.001) GAGES scores as well as FES manual skills performance (pre: 270.9, SD 105.5, post: 477.4, SD 68.9; p < 0.001) for the total cohort. There was no difference in post-test GAGES performance or FES manual skills exam performance between the two groups. Both the proficiency and repetition group had a 100% pass rate on the FES skills exam following VR curriculum completion. Conclusion A VR endoscopy curriculum translates to improved performance in upper and lower endoscopy in a live animal model. VR curricula type did not affect FES manual skills examination or live colonoscopy outcomes; however, a proficiency curriculum is less time-consuming and can provide a structured approach to prepare for both the FES exam and clinical endoscopy.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available