PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16301037

EUS training and practice patterns among gastroenterologists completing training since 1993.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: EUS training and practice patterns vary widely. The aim of this study was to assess EUS training methods, volumes, and practice patterns, and to obtain subjective assessment of endoscopic competence from endosonographers. METHODS: A survey was sent to over 1400 U.S. and international gastroenterologists who completed training since 1993. We assessed demographics, whether EUS is performed, how EUS training was obtained, and volume and type of EUS procedures performed in training and at present. Subjective assessment of adequacy of training was also obtained. RESULTS: A total of 157 physicians responded, including 76 EUS performers, of whom 67% completed advanced endoscopy fellowship, 14% were EUS trained during GI fellowship, and 19% learned via other means. EUS performers were subgrouped into those who had and had not completed advanced endoscopy fellowship, and those within and outside of an academic practice. There were significant associations between the number of upper EUS, pancreaticobiliary, and EUS-guided FNAs performed during training (p < 0.001 for all 3 groups) and completion of advanced endoscopy fellowship. Physicians in academic practice performed more EUS and FNAs per month than physicians in other types of practice (p values <0.001 and 0.001, respectively); 93.3% of respondents felt they received adequate instruction in diagnostic EUS, regardless of type of training; 88.9% of EUS performers felt they received adequate instruction in performing FNA. CONCLUSIONS: Most EUS performers are in academic practice. Those with advanced training obtained higher training volumes and perform higher volumes of EUS. The majority of respondents felt well trained regardless of training type and the number of procedures performed during training. This is the first analysis to assess these aspects of EUS training and practice.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Sanjeev M Wasan, Asha S Kapadia, Douglas G Adler. 2005. EUS training and practice patterns among gastroenterologists completing training since 1993.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2005.08.045

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Challenges in drug development for muscle disease: a stakeholders' meeting.

Current treatment benefits for patients with muscle disease are limited, but progress in legislative and scientific initiatives have set the stage for the development of new therapies. The MD-CARE Act (Public Law 107-84), which allocates federal resources to muscular dystrophy, was approved by Congress and signed into law by the President of the United States in 2001. This has shifted the emphasis toward translational research. To facilitate a push toward therapy for muscle disorders, the Muscular Dystrophy Association (MDA) sponsored a meeting with representatives from industry, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and other government agencies and academia. Each contributed in different ways. The FDA helped define the necessary data to support investigational new drug (IND) applications including the design of proof-of-principle studies, outcome measures for clinical trials, and the pathway for developing surrogate measures for fast-tracking promising new drugs. The NIH, other government agencies, and the MDA described potential funding sources for translational research. Industry delineated a complementary role with academia, and academic investigators elucidated the current strengths and weaknesses of available clinical endpoints. The meeting provided a format for communication for diverse disciplines that usually have no common meeting ground, helping to lay the foundation for bringing products to market in a timely fashion.

Academic Medical Centers↗

Reporting of adverse drug reactions: predictors of under-reporting in Malaysia.

BACKGROUND: Malaysia like many other countries worldwide uses spontaneous reporting systems as a mean of collecting data on suspected adverse drug reaction (ADR). However, compared to other countries, which use the system, the reporting rate in Malaysia is very low. Why some physicians do not report ADRs is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors, which would predict physicians' failure to send ADR reports. DESIGN AND SETTING: Face-to-face interview using a structured questionnaire involving physicians working at the University of Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia. RESULTS: About a third of the physicians in the Centre participated. Sixty-five of the 415 approached refused to participate. A high proportion of the respondents (81.4%) indicated that they had suspected an ADR but did not report it, while about 40% of the respondents were not aware of the existence of the national reporting system in Malaysia. Logistic regression modelling identified the variable 'ADR considered to be too trivial or too well known to report' as the strongest predictor of not reporting, followed by physicians' category and uncertainty that the reaction had been definitely caused by a drug. CONCLUSION: Important predictor variables, which limit physicians from reporting ADR in Malaysia, were related to uncertainty of types of reaction to report, lack of awareness about the existence, function and purpose of national ADR reporting. The findings could be useful for planning strategies to improve the reporting rate.

Academic Medical Centers↗