PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Robert E Sedlack

Publications and source records attributed to Robert E Sedlack.

11 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Validation of a colonoscopy simulation model for skills assessment.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose is to provide initial validation of a novel simulation model's fidelity and ability to assess competence in colonoscopy skills. METHODS: In a prospective, cross-sectional design, each of 39 endoscopists (13 staff, 13 second year fellows, and 13 novices) performed a colonoscopy on a novel bovine simulation model. Staff endoscopists also completed a survey examining different aspects of the model's realism as compared to human colonoscopy. The groups' simulation performances were compared. Additionally, individual performances were correlated to patient-based performance data. RESULTS: Median model realism evaluation scores were favorable for nearly all parameters evaluated with mucosa appearance, endoscopic view, and paradoxical motion parameters receiving the highest scores. During simulation procedures, each group outperformed the less experienced groups in all parameters evaluated. Specifically, median cecal intubation times were: staff 226 s (IQR [interquartile range] 179-273), fellows 340 s (282-568), and novices 1,027 s (970-1,122) (P < 0.05). Median total procedure times on the model were: staff 468 s (416-501), fellows 527 s (459-824), and novices 1,350 s (1,318-1,428) (P < 0.05). Finally, individual cecal intubation times on the simulation model had a very high correlation to their respective patient-based times (r = 0.764). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this model possesses a favorable degree of realism and is able to easily differentiate users based on their level of colonoscopy experience. More impressive, however, is the strong correlation between individual's simulated intubation times and actual patient-based colonoscopy data. In light of these findings, we speculate that this model has potential to be an effective tool for assessment of colonoscopic competence.

Animals↗
PubMed2006

Simulators in training: defining the optimal role for various simulation models in the training environment.

Clearly, the potential applications for simulation training in endoscopy are vast. Endoscopy models may serve as a platform to introduce new skills, to maintain proficiency, or even to assess competency. As these applications are explored fully, the strengths and weaknesses of specific devices will dictate their roles. Educators must ensure that these roles are founded on reliable research but remain mindful that simulators are only tools to augment clinical training, with the goal of benefiting both student and patient, and are not a replacement for patient-based experience.

Animals↗
PubMed2005

The impact of a hands-on ERCP workshop on clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Hands-on endoscopy workshops are increasingly common venues for procedure training. However, the effect of this type of training on the practices of participants is unknown. The goal of this study was to examine the changes in individual clinical practices subsequent to participation in an ERCP hands-on course. METHODS: Forty-eight practicing pancreatobiliary endoscopists participating in a 2-day hands-on advanced ERCP course were asked to complete a 24-item survey evaluating their endoscopic practices both before and 3 months after workshop participation. The surveys evaluated monthly volume and self-confidence in performing the following procedures: diagnostic ERCP, standard sphincterotomy, needle-knife pre-cut sphincterotomy, biliary stone extraction, mechanical lithotripsy, plastic stent placement, metal stent placement, and biliary brushing for cytologic specimens. RESULTS: Thirty-one of the 48 participants (65%) who completed both pre- and postcourse surveys form the study cohort. After the workshop, there was a significant increase in use of needle-knife pre-cut sphincterotomy in clinical practices. In addition, the post-workshop survey indicated a significant increase in confidence for procedures such standard sphincterotomy, needle-knife pre-cut sphincterotomy, stone extraction, mechanical lithotripsy, placement of metal stents, and cytology brushing. Confidence in basic diagnostic ERCP and plastic stent placement did not increase because of high initial confidence levels. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in a hands-on course appears to increase the confidence of endoscopists in the performance of more complex interventions. However, this was only associated with increased clinical application for one technique.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Computer simulation training enhances patient comfort during endoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Computer-based endoscopy simulator (CBES) training's impact on patient-based outcomes has never been examined. This study examines whether the endoscopy skills of trainees are improved and patient discomfort is reduced as a result of CBES training. METHODS: From July 2001-June 2002, 38 residents received either 1 week of patient-based training (PBT) alone in flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) or 3 hours of simulator-based training (SBT) before a week of training in FS. Patients completed questionnaires grading the discomfort experienced during endoscopy (1, no pain; 10, worst pain of life). In addition, residents' performance was graded by the supervising staff and themselves with 8 performance parameters by using a 1-10 Likert scale (1, strongly agree; 5, neutral; 10, strongly disagree). RESULTS: Nineteen SBT and 19 PBT residents performed 150 and 175 FS, respectively. During this same period, staff completed 585 FS. The median patient discomfort score for SBT residents was significantly less than for PBT residents, 3 (25%-75% interquartile range [IQR], 2-5) vs. 4 (IQR, 2-6) (P < 0.01). Discomfort scores for both resident groups were significantly greater than those recorded by staff endoscopists, 2 (IQR, 1-4) (P < 0.01). No difference was seen in the residents' procedural skill scores. Resident self-evaluation scores were significantly greater than those received from the supervising staff. CONCLUSIONS: Increased patient comfort resulted from simulation training, demonstrating that CBES training has a direct benefit to the patient. Although no measurable impact on residents' performance skills was observed, we do demonstrate that residents perceive themselves as having acquired greater endoscopic skills in contrast to staff evaluations.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed2004

Computer simulator training enhances the competency of gastroenterology fellows at colonoscopy: results of a pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: Computer-based colonoscopy simulation (CBCS) is being utilized in endoscopy training without supporting evidence that it improves patient-based colonoscopy performance. The goal of this pilot study was to determine if CBCS training improves gastroenterology (GI) fellows' patient-based colonoscopy skills. METHODS: Competency at colonoscopy among 4 novice GI fellows who completed a 6-h CBCS curriculum was compared with 4 novice fellows who were not CBCS-trained. Measurements of competency were rendered by supervising faculty by recording "insertion time,""depth of unassisted insertion,""independent procedure completion,""ability to identify endoscopic landmarks,""inserts in a safe manner,""adequately visualizes mucosa on withdrawal," and "responds appropriately to patient discomfort" with each colonoscopy. RESULTS: Simulator-trained fellows outperformed traditionally trained fellows during their initial 15 colonoscopies in all performance aspects except "insertion time" (pp < 0.05). Simulator-trained fellows inserted the endoscope significantly further and reached the cecum independently nearly twice as often during this early training period. Three parameters ("depth of insertion,""independent completion," and "ability to identify landmarks") demonstrated a continued advantage out to 30 colonoscopies. Beyond 30 procedures, there was no difference in the performance of the two groups. CONCLUSION: In this pilot study, a 6-h CBCS curriculum provides an early training advantage by enhancing competency at the early stages of patient-based colonoscopy. These advantages are negligible after approximately 30 patient-based procedures. CBCS-enhanced training may allow faculty to be more efficient with their colonoscopy practice.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed2003

Validation of a computer-based colonoscopy simulator.

BACKGROUND: The computer-based colonoscopy simulator is intended to provide a realistic colonoscopic experience and feedback to operators regarding procedure skills. Advocates hope that computer-based colonoscopy simulators will enhance the mastery of colonoscopy by trainees. Before this hypothesis can be tested, the claims made for a simulator must be validated. The aims of this study were to answer the following: Does a computer-based colonoscopy simulator provide a "realistic" experience? Do computer-based colonoscopy simulators' performance parameters differentiate varying levels of experience? METHODS: Ten staff gastroenterologists, 6 gastroenterology fellows, and 6 residents each performed 2 computer-based colonoscopy simulator colonoscopies and performance parameters were recorded. Staff colonoscopists then completed a 6-item survey grading the "realism" of the simulation and procedure difficulty. Survey responses and performance scores were compared with the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: Faculty found the computer-based colonoscopy simulator experience to be realistic despite the "cases" being markedly easier than actual colonoscopy. The computer-based colonoscopy simulator distinguishes subjects according to endoscopic experience with 3 of its measured parameters (total procedure time, insertion time, time in "red-out"). No significant difference in the ability to distinguish among user types was found for the other 10 computer-based colonoscopy simulator measurements for which data were analyzable. CONCLUSION: The computer-based colonoscopy simulator provides a favorable degree of virtual realism with regard to visual simulation and colonoscope mechanics, although the "cases" were regarded as considerably easier than actual colonoscopy. The computer-based colonoscopy simulator has only limited capability for distinguishing varying levels of competence at actual colonoscopy. These findings suggest that a study to determine the role of computer-based colonoscopy simulators in the curriculum of trainees is warranted.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed2002

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

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

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed2002

Celiac disease-associated autoimmune cholangitis.

There is an association between celiac disease (CD) and primary biliary cirrhosis, but there is little information regarding the association between CD and autoimmune cholangitis (antimitochondrial antibody-negative primary biliary cirrhosis). We describe a case of a 60-yr-old woman with chronic serum liver biochemistry elevations, recent onset of pruritus, and unexplained iron deficiency anemia. Liver biopsy was suggestive of stage 1 primary biliary cirrhosis, but serum antimitochondrial antibody testing was negative. Subsequent evaluation revealed CD based on markedly elevated antiendomysial antibody titers and characteristic histological features on mucosal biopsies. Initiation of a gluten-free diet led to resolution of iron deficiency anemia, pruritus, and elevated serum liver biochemistries. This suggests that CD may play a direct role in the development of autoimmune cholangitis. Additionally, normalization of hepatic biochemistries may be achieved without the use of immunosuppressive agents in some patients. CD should be considered in all patients diagnosed with autoimmune cholangitis as a gluten-free diet may avoid the need for immunosuppressive therapy in affected patients.

Autoimmune Diseases↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement without skin incision: results of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: During percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement, skin incision is performed as standard practice. We suspected that this time-honored principle is unnecessary. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized trial, 50 adults undergoing PEG placement were randomized to skin incision omission PEG (IOPEG) and standard PEG (SPEG). Two- and 7-day PEG site evaluations were performed to grade stomal infection, bleeding, pain, and overall satisfaction using a standardized scoring system. Median stomal evaluation scores were compared between groups using a Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Completion rates were compared using a t-test. RESULTS: Placement success for the IOPEG and SPEG technique was 22/25 (88%) and 24/25 (96%), respectively (p = NS). Three failed IOPEG attempts required an incision to complete due to increased pull force encountered. One SPEG failed due to inability to transilluminate. Stomal evaluation scores of infection, bleeding, pain, leakage, and patient satisfaction were not significantly different at 2 or 7 days. No serious complications occurred as a result of skin incision omission. CONCLUSIONS: Omitting the skin incision does not significantly alter the placement success rate, patient satisfaction, or the rate of stomal complications, thus dispelling the dogma that a skin incision is mandatory for PEG placement and the myth that incisions reduce infectious complications.

Adult↗