Factors defining expertise in screening colonoscopy

Abstract

Background and study aims There is very little literature defining characteristics of expert endoscopists. It is hypothesised that previously undetermined human factors may correlate with high performance in screening colonoscopists. The aim of this study was to determine factors contributing towards expertise in screening colonoscopy.

Materials and methods A focus group was used to hypothesise skills considered to be relevant to high performance in colonoscopy. The skills were then ranked in order of importance by an independent group of screening colonoscopists for both diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy. Twenty screening colonoscopists subsequently participated in individual semi-structured interviews to explore participants’ views of expertise and the factors contributing to it. Data extracted from the interview transcripts were used to identify the thematic framework associated with expertise.

Results The 5 initial highest-ranked themes were low complication rates, high adenoma detection rates, interpersonal skills with staff, communication skills, and manner with patients. Interviewees considered technical skills (20/20), previous experience of colonoscopy (19/20), judgment/decision-making (18/20), communication (18/20), teamwork (15/20), resources (11/20) and leadership (8/20) to be the most important themes related to expertise.

Conclusions Both technical and non-technical abilities are considered essential components of expertise by experienced colonoscopists. Further research into targeted interventions to improve the rate of acquisition of these skills in training endoscopists may be useful in improving performance.

• References

• 1 Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S. et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 1296-1308
• 2 Corley DA, Jensen CD, Marks AR. et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 1298-1306
• 3 Gellad ZF, Weiss DG, Ahnen DJ. et al. Colonoscopy withdrawal time and risk of neoplasia at 5 years: results from VA Cooperative Studies Program 380. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 1746-1752
• 4 Koksal AS, Kalkan IH, Torun S. et al. A simple method to improve adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy: altering patient position. Can J Gastroenterol 2013; 27: 509-512
• 5 Corte C, Dahlenburg L, Selby W. et al. Hyoscine butylbromide administered at the cecum increases polyp detection: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 917-922
• 6 Hlavaty T, Huorka M, Koller T. et al. Colorectal cancer screening in patients with ulcerative and Crohn's colitis with use of colonoscopy, chromoendoscopy and confocal endomicroscopy. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 23: 680-689
• 7 Patel KP, Thomas-Gibson S, Faiz O. et al. Tu1319 An Evaluation of Screening Colonoscopists' Performance After a Structured Accreditation Process. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: AB497-AB498
• 8 Ekkelenkamp VE, Koch AD, Haringsma J. et al. Endoscopist-related factors contributing to high-quality colonoscopy: results of a Delphi survey. Perspect Med Educ 2014; 3: 31-40
• 9 Ferlitsch A, Glauninger P, Gupper A. et al. Evaluation of a virtual endoscopy simulator for training in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Endoscopy 2002; 34: 698-702
• 10 Haycock A, Koch AD, Familiari P. et al. Training and transfer of colonoscopy skills: a multinational, randomized, blinded, controlled trial of simulator versus bedside training. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 298-307
• 11 Grantcharov TP, Carstensen L, Schulze S. Objective assessment of gastrointestinal endoscopy skills using a virtual reality simulator. JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2005; 9: 130-133
• 12 Sedlack RE, Baron TH, Downing SM. et al. Validation of a colonoscopy simulation model for skills assessment. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 64-74
• 13 Koch A, Haringsma J, Schoon E. et al. A second-generation virtual reality simulator for colonoscopy: validation and initial experience. Endoscopy 2008; 40: 735
• 14 Riem N, Boet S, Bould M. et al. Do technical skills correlate with non-technical skills in crisis resource management: a simulation study. Br J Anaesth 2012; 109: 723-728
• 15 Arbous MS, Grobbee DE, van Kleef JW. et al. Dutch case-control study of anaesthesia-related morbidity and mortality. Rationale and methods. Anaesthesia 1998; 53: 162-168
• 16 Caelli K, Ray L, Mill J. ‘Clear as mud’: toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research. International journal of qualitative methods 2003; 2: 1-13
• 17 Green J, Britten N. Qualitative research and evidence based medicine. BMJ 1998; 316: 1230
• 18 Patton MQ. Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. Health Serv Res 1999; 34: 1189
• 19 Kohlbacher F. The use of qualitative content analysis in case study research. In, Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research; 2006
• 20 Larkin M, Thompson A. Interpretative phenomenological analysis. Qualitative research methods in mental health and psychotherapy: A guide for students and practitioners. 2003: 101-116
• 21 Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N. Analysing qualitative data. Qualitative Research in Health Care. Third Edition 2007: 63-81
• Joffe H, Yardley L. 4 Content And Thematic Analysis. In: Marks D, Yardley L. Research methods for clinical and health psychology. London: Sage; 2004: 56-68
• 23 Charlton CR, Dearing KS, Berry JA. et al. Nurse practitioners’ communication styles and their impact on patient outcomes: an integrated literature review. J Am Acad Nurse Pract 2008; 20: 382-388
• 24 Street RL, Makoul G, Arora NK. et al. How does communication heal? Pathways linking clinician–patient communication to health outcomes. Patient Educ Couns 2009; 74: 295-301
• 25 Mishra A, Catchpole K, Dale T. et al. The influence of non-technical performance on technical outcome in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 2008; 22: 68-73
• 26 Catchpole K, Mishra A, Handa A. et al. Teamwork and error in the operating room: analysis of skills and roles. Ann Surg 2008; 247: 699-706
• 27 ElBardissi AW, Wiegmann DA, Henrickson S. et al. Identifying methods to improve heart surgery: an operative approach and strategy for implementation on an organizational level. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2008; 34: 1027-1033
• 28 Hull L, Arora S, Aggarwal R. et al. The impact of nontechnical skills on technical performance in surgery: a systematic review. J Am Coll Surg 2012; 214: 214-230
• 29 McCulloch P, Mishra A, Handa A. et al. The effects of aviation-style non-technical skills training on technical performance and outcome in the operating theatre. Quality and Safety in Health Care 2009; 18: 109-115
• 30 Salas E, Wilson KA, Burke CS. et al. Does crew resource management training work? An update, an extension, and some critical needs. Human Factors 2006; 48: 392-412
• 31 Clark PR. Teamwork: building healthier workplaces and providing safer patient care. Crit Care Nurs Q 2009; 32: 221-231
• 32 Leedom DK, Simon R. Improving team coordination: a case for behavior-based training. Mil Psychol 1995; 7: 109
• 33 Stout RJ, Salas E, Fowlkes JE. Enhancing teamwork in complex environments through team training. Group Dyn 1997; 1: 169
• 34 Matharoo M, Haycock A, Sevdalis N. et al. Endoscopic non-technical skills team training: The next step in quality assurance of endoscopy training. World journal of gastroenterology: WJG 2014; 20: 17507
• 35 Kahi CJ, Ballard D, Shah AS. et al. Impact of a quarterly report card on colonoscopy quality measures. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 925-931
• 36 Chaptini L, Laine L. Can I improve my adenoma detection rate?. J Clin Gastroenterol 2015; 49: 270-281
• 37 Anderson J. The future of gastroenterology training: instruction in technical skills. Frontline Gastroenterology 2012; 3: i13-i18