Three-dimensional motion tracking correlates with skill level in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

Background and study aim: Feedback is an essential part of training in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Virtual reality simulators provide limited feedback, focusing only on visual recognition with no feedback on the procedural part of training. Motion tracking identifies patterns of movement, and this study aimed to explore the correlation between skill level and operator movement using an objective automated tool.

Methods: In this medical education study, 37 operators (12 senior doctors who performed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, 13 doctors with varying levels of experience, and 12 untrained medical students) were tested using a virtual reality simulator. A motion sensor was used to collect data regarding the distance between the hands, and height and movement of the scope hand. Test characteristics between groups were explored using Kruskal-Wallis H and Man-Whitney U exact tests.

Results: All motion-tracking metrics showed discriminative ability primarily between experts and novices in specific sequences.

Conclusion: Motion tracking can discriminate between operators with different experience levels in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Motion tracking can be used to provide feedback regarding posture and movement during endoscopy training.

• References

• 1 Walsh CM, Sherlock ME, Ling SC et al. Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012; 6: CD008237
• 2 Brydges R, Carnahan H, Safir O et al. How effective is self-guided learning of clinical technical skills? It’s all about process. . Med Educ 2009; 43: 507-515
• 3 Magill RA. Motor learning and control. 8th edn New York: McGraw-Hill; 2006
• 4 Ferlitsch A, Schoefl R, Puespoek A et al. Effect of virtual endoscopy simulator training on performance of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2010; 42: 1049-1056
• 5 Martin JA, Regehr G, Reznick R et al. Objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) for surgical residents. Br J Surg 1997; 84: 273-278
• 6 Cotton PB, Williams CB. Practical gastrointestinal endoscopy. 6th edn. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2011
• 7 Moorthy K, Munz Y, Jiwanji M et al. Validity and reliability of a virtual reality upper gastrointestinal simulator and cross validation using structured assessment of individual performance with video playback. Surg Endosc 2004; 18: 328-333
• 8 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
• 9 Mobini A, Behzadipour S, Saadat FoumaniM. Accuracy of Kinect’s skeleton tracking for upper body rehabilitation applications. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2014; 9: 344-352
• 10 Svendsen MB, Preisler L, Hillingsoe JG et al. Using motion capture to assess colonoscopy experience level. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 6: 193-199
• 11 Konge L, Vilmann P, Clementsen P et al. Reliable and valid assessment of competence in endoscopic ultrasonography and fine-needle aspiration for mediastinal staging of non-small cell lung cancer. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 928-933
• 12 Cook DA, Hatala R. Got power? A systematic review of sample size adequacy in health professions education research. . Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2015; 20: 73-83
• 13 Downing SM, Yudkowsky R. Assessment in health professions education. 1st edn. New York: Routledge; 2009
• 14 Cook DA, West CP. Perspective: reconsidering the focus on “outcomes research” in medical education: a cautionary note. Acad Med 2013; 88: 162-167