Frost John Warwick, Kurup Arun, Shetty Sharan, Fisher Neil
Dudley Group of Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Gastroenterology, Dudley, UK nad Northern Ireland.
Endosc Int Open. 2017 Jul;5(7):E559-E562. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-105579. Epub 2017 Jun 23.
Findings in the literature are conflicting on whether trainee involvement in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures is detrimental to cannulation success rates. We addressed this in a prospective study, where cannulation success with or without trainee presence was the primary outcome measure.
We prospectively recorded data on 2 senior endoscopists and their trainees over an 18-month period for ERCPs in patients with a virgin ampulla. Presence or absence of a trainee at ERCP procedures was pragmatic, reflecting their other service or training commitments or annual leave. For trainee presence, the training protocol allowed them 6 minutes of supervised time in which to achieve biliary cannulation after reaching the ampulla. Study outcome measures included cannulation success, time to cannulation, technique, whether this was achieved independently by the trainee, and complications.
There were 219 procedures recorded and analyzed (134 with a trainee, 85 without). Three trainees were involved. Selective biliary cannulation was achieved in 201 (92 %) of cases. When a trainee was present, cannulation was successful in 122/134 procedures (91 %), compared to 79/85 (93 %) with a senior endoscopist alone ( = 0.8, Fisher's exact test). Mean time to biliary cannulation with a trainee present was 7 minutes, compared with 5 minutes with no trainee. Mean time for successful independent cannulation by the trainee was 4 minutes, and 9 minutes for a consultant following a trainee's attempt. There were no serious adverse events.
Our study shows that with this training protocol, involvement of a trainee on a routine secondary care ERCP list does not impair biliary cannulation success, and does not prolong a subsequent attempt by the senior endoscopist if initially unsuccessful. These findings support the involvement of trainees in routine ERCP lists with this training protocol.
关于实习医生参与内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)操作是否会对插管成功率产生不利影响,文献中的研究结果相互矛盾。我们在一项前瞻性研究中探讨了这一问题,该研究以有无实习医生在场时的插管成功率作为主要结局指标。
我们前瞻性地记录了2名资深内镜医师及其实习医生在18个月期间对初诊壶腹患者进行ERCP操作的数据。实习医生是否参与ERCP操作是根据实际情况决定的,这反映了他们的其他服务或培训任务以及年假情况。对于实习医生参与的情况,培训方案允许他们在到达壶腹后有6分钟的监督时间来完成胆管插管。研究结局指标包括插管成功率、插管时间、技术、实习医生是否独立完成插管以及并发症情况。
共记录并分析了219例操作(134例有实习医生参与,85例无实习医生参与)。有3名实习医生参与其中。201例(92%)病例成功完成了选择性胆管插管。当有实习医生在场时,134例操作中有122例(91%)插管成功,而仅由资深内镜医师操作时,85例中有79例(93%)插管成功(P = 0.8,Fisher精确检验)。有实习医生在场时胆管插管的平均时间为7分钟,无实习医生时为5分钟。实习医生成功独立插管的平均时间为4分钟,实习医生尝试后由顾问医生完成插管的平均时间为9分钟。未发生严重不良事件。
我们的研究表明,采用该培训方案时,实习医生参与常规二级护理ERCP操作清单不会损害胆管插管成功率,并且如果最初未成功,也不会延长资深内镜医师随后的尝试时间。这些发现支持实习医生按照该培训方案参与常规ERCP操作清单。