Lack of a discriminatory function for endoscopy skills on a computer-based simulator.
BACKGROUND
Computer-based endoscopy simulators have been developed to enable trainees to learn and gain technical endoscopic skills before operating on patients. However, these simulators have not been validated as models of patient-based endoscopy. This study aimed to determine whether a computer-based simulator can accurately represent an actual esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy and to evaluate its ability to discriminate between varying levels of expertise in performing endoscopic procedures based on objective parameters.


METHODS
In a prospective, observational trial, five first-year gastroenterology fellows and six gastroenterology attendings from a single academic center completed six endoscopy cases on the Simbionix GI Mentor II endoscopy simulator. The cases were selected to represent common clinical scenarios. The performance parameters were collected by the simulator. The 13 performance parameters measured by the endoscopy simulator were compared between the two study groups. After the simulator cases, the participants completed a survey evaluating the realism of the simulator.


RESULTS
Novices and experts were able to complete the tasks in the simulated cases with no significant overall differences between the two groups. The computer-based simulator was able to discriminate levels of expertise only for parameters related to the time spent on the procedure (total time, time to reach the second duodenum, time to reach the cecum, and efficiency of screening). No statistically significant differences were found for the other nine performance parameters measured by the simulator. Based on the survey data, expert opinion concluded that the simulator does not offer a realistic simulation of human endoscopy.


CONCLUSIONS
The computer-based endoscopy simulator displays a lack of ability to discriminate between novices and experts in terms of endoscopic skills based on measured objective performance parameters. The findings of this study suggest that the computer-based simulator lacks fidelity and that upgrades are necessary to increase the simulator's ability to reproduce human endoscopy more accurately.
Kim
Stephen
S
Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. stephen.kim@uphs.upenn.edu
Spencer
Geoffrey
G
Makar
George A
GA
Ahmad
Nuzhat A
NA
Jaffe
David L
DL
Ginsberg
Gregory G
GG
Kuchenbecker
Katherine J
KJ
Kochman
Michael L
ML
D002983:Clinical Competence; D003113:Colonoscopy / Q000592:standards*; D003198:Computer Simulation; D004384:Duodenoscopy / Q000592:standards*; D004945:Esophagoscopy / Q000592:standards*; D005773:Gastroscopy / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D011446:Prospective Studies
Am J Surg. 2005 Apr;189(4):497-500
15820469
Endoscopy. 2002 Sep;34(9):698-702
12195326
Gastrointest Endosc. 2003 Feb;57(2):214-8
12556787
Gastrointest Endosc. 1999 Jun;49(6):845-53
10343249
Surg Endosc. 2008 Jan;22(1):158-62
17516114
Acad Med. 2002 Jul;77(7):750-1
12114172
Am J Gastroenterol. 2004 Jan;99(1):33-7
14687137
Surg Endosc. 2003 Oct;17(10):1583-9
12915972
Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Jan;102(1):64-74
17100968
Gastrointest Endosc. 2004 Aug;60(2):196-200
15278044
Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Sep;64(3):361-8
16923483
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008 Jul;23(7 Pt 1):1046-50
18554236