Department of Surgery, School of Allied Health Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, MS: BCM115, DeBakey Building, M108K, One Baylor Plaza, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Department of Surgery, NorthShore University Health System, Chicago, IL, USA.
Surg Endosc. 2018 Jan;32(1):225-228. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5663-1. Epub 2017 Jun 21.
Previous work has shown that up to 30% of graduating surgery residents fail the fundamentals of endoscopic surgery (FES) exam. This study investigated the extent to which FES pass rates differ in a specific sample of individuals who have chosen a career in GI surgery and to examine the relationships between FES performance and confidence in performing flexible endoscopy.
Fellows attending the 2016 SAGES Flexible Endoscopy Course were invited to complete the FES manual skills examination. Participants also provided survey responses examining demographics, fellowship type, endoscopy curricula in residency, previous endoscopic case volume, confidence in performing endoscopy, and future practice plans.
Twenty-nine (age: 32.24 ± 3.24; 72% men) fellows completed the FES skills examination. Reported fellowships were MIS/Bariatric (41.4%), MIS (24.1%), bariatric (13.8%), flexible endoscopy (6.9%), Advanced GI (6.9%), and MIS/bariatric/flexible endoscopy (6.9%). Almost half (41.4%) had previously participated in a simulation curricula, with 20.7% completing a didactic endoscopy curriculum. Fellows reported performing an average of 110 ± 109.48 EGDs and 77.44 ± 58.80 colonoscopies. The majority (96.4%) indicated that they will perform endoscopy at least occasionally in practice. Overall pass rate was 60%. Previous endoscopy experience did not correlate with overall FES examination scores. However, confidence performing EGDs (r = 0.57, p < 0.01), colonoscopies (r = 0.45, p < 0.05), polypectomy (r = 0.52, p < 0.01), and PEGs (r = 0.46, p < 0.05) did.
These data support existing research suggesting that current flexible endoscopy training in residency may be insufficient for trainees to pass the FES examination, and that failure rates hold true even for this select group of trainees who have chosen a profession in GI surgery and intend to use endoscopy in practice.
先前的研究表明,多达 30%的外科住院医师未能通过内镜手术基础知识(FES)考试。本研究旨在调查在选择胃肠外科职业的特定人群中,FES 通过率的差异程度,并探讨 FES 表现与进行灵活内镜检查的信心之间的关系。
应邀参加 2016 年 SAGES 灵活内镜课程的研究员被邀请参加 FES 手工技能考试。参与者还提供了调查回复,内容包括人口统计学、奖学金类型、住院医师内镜课程、以前的内镜病例量、进行内镜检查的信心以及未来的实践计划。
29 名(年龄:32.24±3.24;72%为男性)研究员完成了 FES 技能考试。报告的奖学金类型包括微创/减重(41.4%)、微创(24.1%)、减重(13.8%)、灵活内镜(6.9%)、高级胃肠病学(6.9%)和微创/减重/灵活内镜(6.9%)。近一半(41.4%)曾参加过模拟课程,其中 20.7%完成了内镜理论课程。研究员报告平均进行了 110±109.48 例胃镜检查和 77.44±58.80 例结肠镜检查。大多数(96.4%)表示他们在实践中至少会偶尔进行内镜检查。总体通过率为 60%。以前的内镜经验与 FES 考试总分无相关性。然而,进行胃镜检查的信心(r=0.57,p<0.01)、结肠镜检查(r=0.45,p<0.05)、息肉切除术(r=0.52,p<0.01)和 PEG 术(r=0.46,p<0.05)与 FES 考试总分相关。
这些数据支持现有研究表明,目前住院医师内镜培训可能不足以使学员通过 FES 考试,即使是选择胃肠外科职业并打算在实践中使用内镜的这一特定学员群体,失败率也是如此。