Face and construct validity of a novel mechanical ERCP simulator

Abstract

Background and study aims Simulation-based training has become an important pillar in competence-based medicine. However, limited data are available on use of simulators in training for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We aimed to determine the face and construct validity of the Boškoski-Costamagna mechanical ERCP Trainer, and to assess its didactic value, as judged by experts.

Methods Participants were divided into four groups based on ERCP lifetime experience: novices, intermediate, experienced, and experts. Participants performed several standardized assignments on the simulator. Outcome parameters included times to complete the procedure, ability to cannulate both ducts, number of attempts to cannulate the common bile duct and pancreatic duct, number of inadvertent pancreatic duct cannulations, successful stent placement, and successful stone extraction. All experts filled out a questionnaire on the simulator’s realism and didactic value.

Results Novices (n = 11) completed the total procedure in 21:09 (min:sec), intermediates (n = 5) in 10:58, experienced (n = 8) in 06:42 and experts (n = 22) in 06:05. Experts were significantly faster than novices (Kruskal-Wallis test P < 0.000). Experts rated the realism of the simulator 7.12 on a 10-point Likert scale. The simulator’s potential as a tool for training novices was rated 3.91 on a four-point Likert scale, and there was a high agreement among experts to include the simulator in the training of novice endoscopists (3.86 on a four-point Likert scale).

Conclusions The novel Boškoski-Costamagna ERCP simulator demonstrates good face and construct validity. ERCP experts highly agree on the didactic value and added value of this simulator in the training curriculum for novice endoscopists.

• References

• 1 Andriulli A, Loperfido S, Napolitano G. et al. Incidence rates of post-ERCP complications: a systematic survey of prospective studies. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 1781-1788
• 2 Watkins JL, Etzkorn KP, Wiley TE. et al. Assessment of technical competence during ERCP training. Gastrointest Endosc 1996; 44: 411-415
• 3 Jowell PS, Baillie J, Branch MS. et al. Quantitative assessment of procedural competence. A prospective study of training in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Ann Intern Med 1996; 125: 983-989
• 4 Ekkelenkamp VE, Koch AD, Rauws EA. et al. Competence development in ERCP: the learning curve of novice trainees. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 949-955
• 5 Committee AT, Jorgensen J, Kubiliun N. et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP): core curriculum. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 279-289
• 6 Cotton PB, Feussner D, Dufault D. et al. A survey of credentialing for ERCP in the United States. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86: 866-869
• 7 Baron TH, Petersen BT, Mergener K. et al. Quality indicators for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: S29-34
• 8 Chutkan RK, Ahmad AS, Cohen J. et al. ERCP core curriculum. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 361-376
• 9 Neerlandicum CG. Herstructurering Opleiding Maag-Darm-Leverziekten. 2008
• 10 van der Wiel SE, Kuttner MagalhaesR, Rocha GoncalvesCR. et al. Simulator training in gastrointestinal endoscopy – From basic training to advanced endoscopic procedures. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2016; 30: 375-387
• 11 Lim BS, Leung JW, Lee J. et al. Effect of ERCP mechanical simulator (EMS) practice on traineesʼ ERCP performance in the early learning period: US multicenter randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2011; 106: 300-306
• 12 Ekkelenkamp VE, Koch AD, de Man RA. et al. Training and competence assessment in GI endoscopy: a systematic review. Gut 2016; 65: 607-615
• 13 Koch AD, Ekkelenkamp VE, Haringsma J. et al. Simulated colonoscopy training leads to improved performance during patient-based assessment. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 630-636
• 14 Carter FJ, Schijven MP, Aggarwal R. et al. Consensus guidelines for validation of virtual reality surgical simulators. Simul Healthc 2006; 1: 171-179
• 15 Allerton DJ. Principles of Flight Simulation Wiley. 2009
• 16 Boskoski I, Costamagna G. The Boskoski-Costamagna ERCP Trainer: from dream to reality. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 593
• 17 Jovanovic I, Fry LC, Rustemovic N. et al. Initial validation of a simple, nonbiological, mechanical ERCP training model for cannulation and stent placement. Endoscopy 2015; 47 (Suppl. 01) E585-586
• 18 Sahakian AB, Laine L, Jamidar PA. et al. Can a computerized simulator assess skill level and improvement in performance of ERCP?. Dig Dis Sci 2016; 61: 722-730
• 19 Bittner JGt, Mellinger JD, Imam T. et al. Face and construct validity of a computer-based virtual reality simulator for ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 357-364
• 20 Arnold SH, Svendsen MB, Konge L. et al. Three-dimensional motion tracking correlates with skill level in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 825-828
• 21 Leung JW, Lee JG, Rojany M. et al. Development of a novel ERCP mechanical simulator. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 65: 1056-1062
• 22 von Delius S, Thies P, Meining A. et al. Validation of the X-Vision ERCP Training System and technical challenges during early training of sphincterotomy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 7: 389-396
• 23 Lickert R. A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Arch Psychol 1932; 140: 5-55
• 24 Frimberger E, von Delius S, Rosch T. et al. A novel and practicable ERCP training system with simulated fluoroscopy. Endoscopy 2008; 40: 517-520
• 25 Neumann M, Mayer G, Ell C. et al. The Erlangen Endo-Trainer: life-like simulation for diagnostic and interventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiography. Endoscopy 2000; 32: 906-910
• 26 Sedlack RE, Petersen BT, Kolars JC. The impact of a hands-on ERCP workshop on clinical practice. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 67-71
• 27 Sedlack R, Petersen B, Binmoeller K. et al. A direct comparison of ERCP teaching models. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 57: 886-890
• 28 Liao WC, Leung JW, Wang HP. et al. Coached practice using ERCP mechanical simulator improves traineesʼ ERCP performance: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 799-805
• 29 Sedlack RE, Baron TH, Downing SM. et al. Validation of a colonoscopy simulation model for skills assessment. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 64-74
• 30 Fayez R, Feldman LS, Kaneva P. et al. Testing the construct validity of the Simbionix GI Mentor II virtual reality colonoscopy simulator metrics: module matters. Surg Endosc 2010; 24: 1060-1065
• 31 Haycock AV, Bassett P, Bladen J. et al. Validation of the second-generation Olympus colonoscopy simulator for skills assessment. Endoscopy 2009; 41: 952-958
• 32 Koch AD, Buzink SN, Heemskerk J. et al. Expert and construct validity of the Simbionix GI Mentor II endoscopy simulator for colonoscopy. Surg Endosc 2008; 22: 158-162