Jirapinyo Pichamol, Imaeda Avlin B, Thompson Christopher C
Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, CT, USA.
Surg Endosc. 2015 Dec;29(12):3570-8. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4110-4. Epub 2015 Mar 24.
The Gastroenterology Core Curriculum and American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provide guidelines for endoscopic training. Program adherence to these recommendations is unclear. This study aims to assess endoscopic training experience during fellowship.
Questionnaire study.
The questionnaire was circulated to US fellowship programs, with the assistance of the American Gastroenterological Association.
Graduating third-year fellows.
Seventy-three fellows returned the questionnaire. Nearly all fellows met the required numbers for esophagoduodenoscopy (98%) and colonoscopy (100%), with fewer meeting requirements for PEG (73%) and non-variceal hemorrhage (75%). The majority of fellows did not meet minimum numbers for variceal banding (40%), esophageal dilation (43%), capsule endoscopy (42%). Fellows rated training in cognitive aspects of endoscopy as 3.86 [1 (inadequate), 5 (excellent)] and reported greatest emphasis on interpreting endoscopic findings and least on virtual colonography. Quality indicators of endoscopy received little emphasis (rating of 3.04; p = 0.00001), with adenoma detection rate being least emphasized. Fifty-six percent of fellows reported having routine endoscopy conferences. Half of the programs have endoscopic simulators, with 15% of fellows being required to use simulation. Following direct hands-on experience, fellows rated external endoscopy courses (64%) as the next most useful experience.
Many fellows do not meet required numbers for several endoscopic procedures, and quality indicators receive little emphasis during training. Most programs do not provide simulation training or hold regular endoscopy conferences. Fellowship programs should perform internal audits and make feasible adjustments. Furthermore, it may be time for professional societies to revisit training guidelines.
胃肠病学核心课程和美国胃肠内镜学会提供了内镜培训指南。各项目对这些建议的遵循情况尚不清楚。本研究旨在评估住院医师培训期间的内镜培训经历。
问卷调查研究。
在美国胃肠病学会的协助下,向美国住院医师培训项目发放了问卷。
即将毕业的三年级住院医师。
73名住院医师回复了问卷。几乎所有住院医师都达到了食管十二指肠镜检查(98%)和结肠镜检查(100%)的要求数量,而达到经皮内镜下胃造口术(PEG,73%)和非静脉曲张性出血治疗(75%)要求的人数较少。大多数住院医师未达到静脉曲张套扎术(40%)、食管扩张术(43%)、胶囊内镜检查(42%)的最低要求数量。住院医师将内镜检查认知方面的培训评为3.86分(1分为不足,5分为优秀),并报告称培训最注重内镜检查结果的解读,而对虚拟结肠镜检查的重视程度最低。内镜检查质量指标很少受到重视(评分为3.04;p = 0.00001),腺瘤检出率受到的重视最少。56%的住院医师报告有常规内镜检查会议。一半的项目有内镜模拟器,其中15%的住院医师被要求使用模拟器。在有直接实践经验后,住院医师将外部内镜课程(64%)评为第二有用的经历。
许多住院医师未达到几种内镜操作的要求数量,且培训期间对质量指标的重视程度较低。大多数项目不提供模拟培训或定期召开内镜检查会议。住院医师培训项目应进行内部审核并做出可行的调整。此外,专业学会可能是时候重新审视培训指南了。