Colonoscopy curriculum development and performance-based assessment criteria on a computer-based endoscopy simulator.

摘要: OBJECTIVE Computer-based colonoscopy simulators (CBCS) have been developed and are being introduced into the training environment. The ability of these to replicate dimensions patient-based diagnostic is good. However, benefit either learners or their patients has not yet established. We describe a process by which CBCS curriculum CBCS-based performance criteria were established for first-year gastroenterology fellows at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. DESCRIPTION used commercially available (AccuTouch Endoscopy Simulator, Immersion Medical, Gaithersburg, MD), consists specialized colonoscope that inserted computer-based module with screen showing colonic lumen virtual patient. A tutorial six cases varying complexity on CBCS. Performance variables measured simulator include time complete procedure, distance scope was advanced, degree mucosa adequately visualized, possible complications such as perforation, level pain experienced simulated To begin, we ideal standards measuring above ten "expert" faculty colonscopists who completed two Next, five partially trained colonoscopists. Finally, non-physician gastrointestinal assistants, without prior endoscopic training, asked practice determine procedure frequency required improve proficiency. By calculating average within each three groups, able estimate number minimal new trainees. Based learning curves novice colonoscopists well performances expert colonoscopists, speculated if be beneficial, would most likely occur early stages training. viewing one-hour, multimedia tutorial, describes various techniques. This followed nine hours hands-on experience, during trainee will approximately 25 colonoscopies. Before advancing live-patient colonoscopies, must meet certain specific cases. These view entire colon less than 15 minutes no complications. DISCUSSION If effective, this should result improved competency colonoscopy, particularly address question, randomized groups: (1) group experiences (2) only. Their surveys patient satisfaction analyzed what, any, provided