Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| The Hospital for Sick Children | OTHER |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The goal of this randomized control study is to determine if the use of standardized coaching language by faculty trainers for teaching colonoscopy is associated with improved colonoscopy performance. The main questions it aims to answer are:
Researchers will compare 2 groups of faculty trainers to to see if the standardized coaching language effects the colonoscopy training quality.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Training Group | Experimental | Faculty participants will participate in educational training designed to teach them standardized coaching language for endoscopy instruction and strategies to promote effective communication during an endoscopy teaching. It will be comprised of:
|
|
| Control Group | Active Comparator | Faculty participants will take part in 'dummy' educational training comprised of:
|
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Educational Training on standardized coaching language | Other | The faculty trainer participants in training groups will watch a 15-min long video between the two simulated endoscopy teaching encounters. The video link will be emailed to them 1 week before the second simulated encounter, and they can watch it in their own time. The training video will demonstrate the use of recommended coaching language for endoscopy instruction (e.g., recommended 14 standard terms, need to refer to the screen when directing a trainee as opposed to their hands, use of a clockface analogy) and communication best practices (e.g., checking to ensure understanding, avoidance of cognitive overload, task deconstruction). |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Change in colonoscopy performance | The de-identified video-recording of the simulated colonoscopy will be assessed by blinded external rater. This will be done using the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool (GiECAT) which is a colonoscopy assessment tool with strong validity evidence. For the GiECAT, 6 global rating items on supervision scale (measuring from 1 to 5) and 5 checklist items which are applicable to simulated procedures (i.e., no patients involved) will be used. Since it is a competency based tool with a checklist, there is no maximum score, but instead is a rating scale. To ensure blinding, only the trainee's gloved hands will be seen, and the videos used for assessment of colonoscopy performance will not have sound to control for any effects the faculty instruction may have on the ratings of performance. | Change from Baseline colonoscopy performance at 2 weeks |
| Change in colonoscopy performance | The de-identified video-recording of the simulated colonoscopy will be assessed by blinded external rater. This will be done using another colonoscopy assessment form with strong validity evidence - 8 'Procedure' items from the Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy (JAG) Colonoscopy Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) form. This is a supervision-based scale (measuring from 1 to 4). Since this is also a competency based tool with a checklist, it has a rating scale with no maximum score. To ensure blinding, only the trainee's gloved hands will be seen, and the videos used for assessment of colonoscopy performance will not have sound to control for any effects the faculty instruction may have on the ratings of performance. | Change from Baseline colonoscopy performance at 2 weeks |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Change in 'Red-out' time | The percentage of procedure time during which the endoscope tip (camera) was against the mucosa of the virtual bowel (i.e., there was no proper visualization of the bowel mucosa - appears as 'reddened out screen', aka 'red-out'), as auto-generated automatically by the colonoscopy simulator. The percentage ranges from 0 to 100. | Change from baseline time in red-out at 2 weeks |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Aayush Gabrani, MD | University of Texas | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTSW | Dallas | Texas | 75390 | United States |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 27345645 | Background | Walsh CM. In-training gastrointestinal endoscopy competency assessment tools: Types of tools, validation and impact. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016 Jun;30(3):357-74. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2016.04.001. Epub 2016 Apr 16. | |
| 27345649 | Background | Waschke KA, Anderson J, Macintosh D, Valori RM. Training the gastrointestinal endoscopy trainer. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016 Jun;30(3):409-19. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2016.05.001. Epub 2016 May 14. |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| NASA-Task Load Index (TLX) scale | View source |
Not provided
Individual Participant Data (IPD) will not be shared because this was not included in the consent form at the time of study design. Most of the participants have already been consented and recruited to participate and IPD was not included in that discussion.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Educational Training on goal setting | Other | The faculty trainer participants in the control groups will watch a 15-min long video between the two simulated endoscopy teaching encounters. The video link will be emailed to them 1 week before the second simulated encounter, and they can watch it in their own time. The video will be a 'dummy' colonoscopy training video which outlines how to set goals ahead of an endoscopy training session. The video will not discuss standardized coaching language and/or communication best practices. |
|
| Change in time to cecum | The time it took the trainee to reach the cecum, as auto-generated automatically by the colonoscopy simulator. This is reported in minutes and seconds (min:sec). The range from 0 to 20 minutes | Change from baseline time to cecum at 2 weeks |
| Change in Cognitive load | Printed forms will be given to all participants immediately after the pre-and post-sessions to measure the cognitive load. It will be measured by 3 measurement tools (Outcome 5-7) Overall cognitive load: A single item rating tool asking participants to rate the amount of mental effort they required to complete the simulated endoscopy on a 9-point scale (1 = very, very small effort and 9 = very, very high effort). | Change from Baseline cognitive load at 2 weeks |
| Change in Cognitive load | Printed forms will be given to all participants immediately after the pre-and post-sessions to measure the cognitive load. NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX): A 6-item rating scale with strong validity evidence that assesses perceived demand, effort and frustration in performing the task, with higher scores indicating an increased cognitive load (Ranges from 0 to 20). | Change from Baseline cognitive load at 2 weeks |
| Change in Cognitive load | Printed forms will be given to all participants immediately after the pre-and post-sessions to measure the cognitive load. Cognitive Load Index for Colonoscopy (for trainees ONLY): A measure of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load related to performing colonoscopy. Fifteen items that are applicable to the simulation will be rated. Given the nature of this scale, it will be administered to trainees only. Scale ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree). | Change from Baseline cognitive load at 2 weeks |
| Change in the Clarity of instruction (trainee's perception) | The clarity of instruction will be rated by the trainee on a Likert scale, using linguistics specific metrics developed an expert in linguistics. Description-based scale with following categories- Excellent, Satisfactory, Needs Improvement and Not Acceptable. This form will be provided to the trainees only to assess their perception of the instructions provided by the faculty instructor. | Change from Baseline trainer's language assessment at 2 weeks |
| Change in the trainer's language (assessed by linguistics expert) | Based on the de-identified video recordings, the trainer's clarity of instructions and use of recommended language will be rated using specialized linguistic-designed assessment rubric by a blinded external linguistics expert. Name of Measurement- Clarity of language and use of standardized terminology Measurement Tool- Linguistics rubric (descriptive rating scale, with following categories- Excellent, Satisfactory, Needs Improvement and Not Acceptable) | Change from Baseline trainer's language assessment at 2 weeks |
| Semi-structured interview of the trainees | In order to complement and enhance the data from above mentioned assessment tools (i.e., clarity of instruction, cognitive load), trainees will be asked to participate in a short 10-15 minute interview with the PI and/or Co-PI after the they have completed all 4 simulated cases, to explore their perceptions of instruction provided. The interview guide has been adapted from a study examining gastroenterology trainees' perception of endoscopy training activities. Interviews will be transcribed (removing any identifiers) and coded qualitatively using a constant comparison approach to compare differences in trainee's perceptions between groups | At 2 weeks |
| Semi-structured interview of the faculty instructor | In order to explore faculty's perceptions of the training modality being tested, faculty participants will also be asked to participate in a separate 10-15 minute long semi-structured interview with the PI and/or co-PI, after completing the 2 simulation sessions with a trainee fellow. The interview guide has been adapted from a study exploring endoscopy trainers' experience in teaching endoscopy. Interview will be transcribed and coded qualitatively using a constant comparison approach to explore the faculty's perception of the instructional strategies. | At 2 weeks |
| 31210174 | Background | Siau K, Green JT, Hawkes ND, Broughton R, Feeney M, Dunckley P, Barton JR, Stebbing J, Thomas-Gibson S. Impact of the Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) on endoscopy services in the UK and beyond. Frontline Gastroenterol. 2019 Apr;10(2):93-106. doi: 10.1136/flgastro-2018-100969. Epub 2018 Nov 13. |
| 21165376 | Background | Coderre S, Anderson J, Rostom A, McLaughlin K. Training the endoscopy trainer: from general principles to specific concepts. Can J Gastroenterol. 2010 Dec;24(12):700-4. doi: 10.1155/2010/493578. |
| 27846065 | Background | Walsh CM, Anderson JT, Fishman DS. Evidence-based Approach to Training Pediatric Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Trainers. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2017 Apr;64(4):501-504. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000001473. |
| 22661458 | Background | Gavin DR, Valori RM, Anderson JT, Donnelly MT, Williams JG, Swarbrick ET. The national colonoscopy audit: a nationwide assessment of the quality and safety of colonoscopy in the UK. Gut. 2013 Feb;62(2):242-9. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-301848. Epub 2012 Jun 1. |
| 31799965 | Background | Broekaert I, Tzivinikos C, Narula P, Antunes H, Dias JA, van der Doef H, Isoldi S, Norsa L, Romano C, Scheers I, Silbermintz A, Tavares M, Torroni F, Urs A, Thomson M. European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Position Paper on Training in Paediatric Endoscopy. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2020 Jan;70(1):127-140. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000002496. No abstract available. |
| 28757268 | Background | Dilly CK, Sewell JL. How to Give Feedback During Endoscopy Training. Gastroenterology. 2017 Sep;153(3):632-636. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.07.023. Epub 2017 Jul 27. No abstract available. |
| 32790087 | Background | Zawadzki M, Gomez Ruiz M, Tou S, Jeffels A, Matzel KE. A proposed system for standardized terminology in minimally invasive surgery - a video vignette. Colorectal Dis. 2020 Dec;22(12):2346-2347. doi: 10.1111/codi.15309. Epub 2020 Sep 16. No abstract available. |
| 31891790 | Background | Lauridsen KG, Watanabe I, Lofgren B, Cheng A, Duval-Arnould J, Hunt EA, Good GL, Niles D, Berg RA, Nishisaki A, Nadkarni VM. Standardising communication to improve in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation. 2020 Feb 1;147:73-80. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2019.12.013. Epub 2019 Dec 28. |
| 33440438 | Background | Khan R, Zheng E, Wani SB, Scaffidi MA, Jeyalingam T, Gimpaya N, Anderson JT, Grover SC, McCreath G, Walsh CM. Colonoscopy competence assessment tools: a systematic review of validity evidence. Endoscopy. 2021 Dec;53(12):1235-1245. doi: 10.1055/a-1352-7293. Epub 2021 Mar 16. |
| 22227035 | Background | Barton JR, Corbett S, van der Vleuten CP; English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme; UK Joint Advisory Group for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. The validity and reliability of a Direct Observation of Procedural Skills assessment tool: assessing colonoscopic skills of senior endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Mar;75(3):591-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.09.053. Epub 2012 Jan 9. |
| 29614526 | Background | Siau K, Dunckley P, Valori R, Feeney M, Hawkes ND, Anderson JT, Beales ILP, Wells C, Thomas-Gibson S, Johnson G; Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG). Changes in scoring of Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) forms and the impact on competence assessment. Endoscopy. 2018 Aug;50(8):770-778. doi: 10.1055/a-0576-6667. Epub 2018 Apr 3. |
| 31738285 | Background | Siau K, Crossley J, Dunckley P, Johnson G, Feeney M, Iacucci M, Anderson JT; Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG). Colonoscopy Direct Observation of Procedural Skills Assessment Tool for Evaluating Competency Development During Training. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020 Feb;115(2):234-243. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000426. |
| 25753836 | Background | Walsh CM, Ling SC, Khanna N, Grover SC, Yu JJ, Cooper MA, Yong E, Nguyen GC, May G, Walters TD, Reznick R, Rabeneck L, Carnahan H. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool: reliability and validity evidence. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81(6):1417-1424.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.11.030. Epub 2015 Mar 7. |
| 25564819 | Background | Walsh CM, Ling SC, Mamula P, Lightdale JR, Walters TD, Yu JJ, Carnahan H. The gastrointestinal endoscopy competency assessment tool for pediatric colonoscopy. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2015 Apr;60(4):474-80. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000000686. |
| 27170086 | Background | Sewell JL, Boscardin CK, Young JQ, Ten Cate O, O'Sullivan PS. Measuring cognitive load during procedural skills training with colonoscopy as an exemplar. Med Educ. 2016 Jun;50(6):682-92. doi: 10.1111/medu.12965. |
| 31179594 | Background | Sewell JL, Young JQ, Boscardin CK, Ten Cate O, O'Sullivan PS. Trainee perception of cognitive load during observed faculty staff teaching of procedural skills. Med Educ. 2019 Sep;53(9):925-940. doi: 10.1111/medu.13914. Epub 2019 Jun 9. |
| 31425188 | Background | Sewell JL, Bowen JL, Cate OT, O'Sullivan PS, Shah B, Boscardin CK. Learning Challenges, Teaching Strategies, and Cognitive Load: Insights From the Experience of Seasoned Endoscopy Teachers. Acad Med. 2020 May;95(5):794-802. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002946. |
| 16451236 | Background | Kennedy TJ, Lingard LA. Making sense of grounded theory in medical education. Med Educ. 2006 Feb;40(2):101-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02378.x. |
| Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy. Course Finder, JAG Endoscopy Training System | View source |
| Canadian Association of Gastroenterology. Skills Enhancement for Endoscopy Program | View source |