PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Juergen Hochberger

Publications and source records attributed to Juergen Hochberger.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Currently available simulators: ex vivo models.

The introduction of the ex vivo tissue endoscopy simulators represents a major advance in endoscopic training, particularly in therapeutic endoscopy. The simulators have been popular teaching tools from the start, and the data supporting their benefit are accruing, especially in hemostasis training. Simulators like the compact EASIE may prove most beneficial as training tools for interventional skills that require repetitive practice and a larger volume of procedures than may occur naturally during the course of standard endoscopy practice. More data are needed to confirm that hands-on simulator training improves outcomes in clinical endoscopic performance and to characterize better the influence of such simulator work on subsequent endoscopic practice. As ex vivo simulators become more available, it is likely that these models will enhance initial training and also allow practicing gastroenterologists to acquire new techniques, maintain their skills, and demonstrate proficiency for credentialing purposes.

Animals↗
PubMed2006

The complementary Erlangen active simulator for interventional endoscopy training is superior to solely clinical education in endoscopic hemostasis--the French training project: a prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: The Erlangen Active Simulator for Interventional Endoscopy (EASIE) using ex-vivo porcine organs was introduced in 1997. The present study should analyze whether repeated EASIE simulator training in endoscopic hemostasis led to superior performance compared with a traditionally educated group. The results were compared with a similar project in New York. METHODS: Thirty-five French GI fellows were enrolled. Baseline skills evaluation was performed in four disciplines (manual skills, injection/coagulation, clip application and variceal ligation) using the compactEASIE-simulator equipped with an upper gastrointestinal organ package for bleeding simulation. The same, translated evaluation forms (from the prior New York project) were used. Subsequently, fellows were randomized into group A (n=17, only clinical education) and group B (n=18, additional three simulator trainings). Group B was trained the next day and after 4 and 7 months by experts of the French Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Both groups performed routine and emergency endoscopies at their home hospitals during the study period. Both groups were re-evaluated blindly after 9 months. RESULTS: The learning curve for group B showed a significant improvement in all disciplines (P<0.004) whereas group A improved significantly in only two of four disciplines at blinded final evaluation (manual skills P=0.02, injection/coagulation P=0.013). The direct comparison of groups B and A at blinded final evaluation showed significantly superior ratings for group B in all disciplines (P<0.006) and significantly shorter performance times in two disciplines (P=0.016 each). The comparison with the similar 'New York project' revealed that preexisting differences in skills were adjusted by the training. CONCLUSION: Complementary trainings (three workshops in 7 months) in endoscopic hemostasis using the compactEASIE improved skills compared with a solely clinical education. The results of the 'New York project' were confirmed and benefits were independent from the medical educational system.

Animals↗
PubMed2005

Efficacy and costs of a one-day hands-on EASIE endoscopy simulator train-the-trainer workshop.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of an intensive hands-on training in endoscopic hemostasis on the compactEASIE simulator has been previously demonstrated in a randomized prospective trial. In the current study, we evaluated how quickly and effectively new tutors, without simulator training experience, are able to acquire teaching skills in endoscopic hemostasis. METHODS: Five tutors with prior Erlangen Active Simulator for Interventional Endoscopy (EASIE) teaching experience instructed 7 endoscopists without prior EASIE experience on how to teach when using the model. These new tutors then independently conducted a workshop for 8 fellows in 4 hemostasis techniques. Results were compared with a historical control trained similarly by experienced tutors. Two one-day workshops in endoscopic hemostasis on the compactEASIE ex vivo endoscopy simulator were conducted in a category A hospital in New York City, New York. Skill scores at the end of training were compared with baseline skills assessments, and qualitative ratings of the new tutors were obtained from both the trainees and the experienced tutors. RESULTS: Significant improvement was achieved by the fellows in all 4 skills areas. Both the expert tutors and the trainees consistently rated the teaching skill of the new tutors highly. Fellows' skill acquisition using new tutors was of similar magnitude to that achieved in the prior EASIE trial using experienced trainers teaching the fellows. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to conduct an effective EASIE train-the-trainer course in one day. Tutors trained in this manner are able to provide a similar educational experience with objective improvement in trainee skill to experts who have conducted many hands-on workshops.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed2005

Training with the compactEASIE biologic endoscopy simulator significantly improves hemostatic technical skill of gastroenterology fellows: a randomized controlled comparison with clinical endoscopy training alone.

BACKGROUND: The Erlangen Active Simulator for Interventional Endoscopy (EASIE) was introduced in 1997 for interventional endoscopy training. compactEASIE developed in 1998 is a modified, light-weight version of the original model. Objective evidence of the benefits of training with these models is limited. A randomized controlled study, therefore, was conducted to compare the effects of intensive 7-month, hands-on training in hemostatic techniques by using the compactEASIE model (in addition to clinical endoscopic training) vs. pure clinical training in endoscopic hemostatic methods. METHODS: Thirty-seven fellows in gastroenterology in New York City area training programs were enrolled. Baseline skills were assessed on the simulator for the following techniques: manual skills, injection and electrocoagulation, hemoclip application, and variceal ligation. Twenty-eight fellows were then randomized into two comparable groups. Those randomized to Group A received purely clinical training in endoscopic hemostatic techniques at their hospitals. Those in Group B, in addition, were trained by experienced tutors in 3 full-day hemostasis workshops over 7 months. Both groups underwent a final evaluation on the compactEASIE simulator conducted by their tutors and additional evaluators who were blinded to the method of training. Initial and final evaluation scores were compared for each group and between groups. Outcomes of actual clinical hemostatic procedures performed during the study period also were analyzed. RESULTS: Ten of 14 fellows randomized to Group A (standard training) and 13 of 14 in Group B (intensive training) returned for the final evaluation. For Group B, scores for all techniques were significantly improved. In Group A, a significant improvement was noted for variceal ligation alone. CONCLUSIONS: compactEASIE simulator training (3 sessions over 7 months), together with clinical endoscopic training resulted in objective improvement in the performance by fellows of all 4 endoscopic hemostatic techniques, whereas significant improvement was noted for variceal ligation alone for fellows who had standard clinical training. In clinical practice, fellows who had intensive simulator/clinical training had a significantly higher success rate and a nonsignificant reduction in the frequency of occurrence of complications.

Animals↗
PubMed2002

Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy: can heparin prevent acute pancreatitis after ERCP?

BACKGROUND: An exploratory analysis of a prospective study of risk factors for acute pancreatitis after ERCP combined with endoscopic sphincterotomy showed that the frequency of acute pancreatitis was lower in patients who received heparin compared with patients not treated with heparin. The study was continued to further analyze the effect of heparin on the frequency of acute pancreatitis. METHODS: Potential risk factors for acute pancreatitis and outcomes were evaluated prospectively for all ERCP procedures with endoscopic sphincterotomy performed between September 1994 and December 1998. The results were analyzed by univariate and multivariate methods to determine risk factors for complications. Heparin was administered to 32.9% of the patients (heparin group [HEP group], n = 268) for various clinical reasons (low-molecular-weight heparin, n = 208, unfractionated heparin n = 60). A group of 547 patients who did not receive heparin served as control patients (CON group). RESULTS: Eight hundred fifteen patients underwent ERCP with endoscopic sphincterotomy; acute pancreatitis occurred in 6.4% (n = 52). The frequency of acute pancreatitis was significantly lower in the HEP group versus the CON group in the final multivariate model, which included significant risk factors for acute pancreatitis (HEP group: 3.4%, 9/268 vs. CON group: 7.9%, 43/547; p = 0.005). HEP did not increase the risk of hemorrhage (HEP group: 1.1%, 3/268, 2 severe, none fatal vs. CON group: 2.0%, 11/547, 3 severe, 2 fatal). HEP (p = 0.005; OR 0.3: 95% CI [0.16, 0.73]) and the number of risk factors present (p = 0.0001; OR 2.5: 95% CI [1.80, 3.50]) influenced the frequency of acute pancreatitis independently. CONCLUSIONS: Heparin was significantly associated with an extremely low frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis without increasing the risk of hemorrhage after endoscopic sphincterotomy. Because this effect could not be attributed to other known or suspected confounders, our conclusion was that heparin administration before ERCP reduces the risk of pancreatitis.

Acute Disease↗