Effect of Polypectomy Simulation-Based Mastery Learning on Skill Retention Among Practicing Endoscopists.

PURPOSE: Practicing endoscopists frequently perform and teach screening colonoscopies and polypectomies, but there is no standardized method to train and assess physicians who perform polypectomy procedures. The authors created a polypectomy simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) curriculum and hypothesized that completion of the curriculum would lead to immediate improvement in polypectomy skills and skill retention at 6 and 12 months after training. METHOD: The authors performed a pretest-posttest cohort study with endoscopists who completed SBML and were randomized to follow-up at 6 or 12 months from May 2021 to August 2022. Participants underwent SBML training, including a pretest, a video lecture, deliberate practice, and a posttest. All learners were required to meet or exceed a minimum passing standard on a 17-item skills checklist before completing training and were randomized to follow-up at 6 or 12 months. The authors compared simulated polypectomy skills performance on the checklist from pretest to posttest and posttest to 6- or 12-month follow-up test. RESULTS: Twenty-four of 30 eligible participants (80.0%) completed the SBML intervention, and 20 of 24 (83.3%) completed follow-up testing. The minimum passing standard was set at 93% of checklist items correct. The pretest passing rate was 4 of 24 participants (16.7%) compared with 24 of 24 participants (100%) at posttest ( P < .001). There were no significant differences in passing rates from posttest to combined 6- and 12-month posttest in which 18 of 20 participants (90.0%) passed. CONCLUSIONS: Before training and despite years of clinical experience, practicing endoscopists demonstrated poor performance of polypectomy skills. SBML was an effective method for practicing endoscopists to acquire and maintain polypectomy skills during a 6- to 12-month period.

Simulation-based training improves polypectomy skills among practicing endoscopists.

Background and study aims Practicing endoscopists have variable polypectomy skills during colonoscopy and limited training opportunities for improvement. Simulation-based training enhances procedural skill, but its impact on polypectomy is unclear. We developed a simulation-based polypectomy intervention to improve polypectomy competency. Methods All faculty endoscopists at our tertiary care center who perform colonoscopy with polypectomy were recruited for a simulation-based intervention assessing sessile and stalked polypectomy. Endoscopists removed five polyps in a simulation environment at pretest followed by a training intervention including a video, practice, and one-on-one feedback. Within 1-4 weeks, endoscopists removed five new simulated polyps at post-test. We used the Direct Observation of Polypectomy Skills (DOPyS) checklist for assessment, evaluating individual polypectomy skills, and global competency (scale: 1-4). Competency was defined as an average global competency score of ≥ 3. Results 83 % (29/35) of eligible endoscopists participated and 95 % (276/290) of planned polypectomies were completed. Only 17 % (5/29) of endoscopists had average global competency scores that were competent at pretest compared with 52 % (15/29) at post-test ( P  = 0.01). Of all completed polypectomies, the competent polypectomy rate significantly improved from pretest to post-test (55 % vs. 71 %; P  < 0.01). This improvement was significant for sessile polypectomy (37 % vs. 65 %; P  < 0.01) but not for stalked polypectomy (82 % vs. 80 %; P  = 0.70). Conclusions Simulation-based training improved polypectomy skills among practicing endoscopists. Further studies are needed to assess the translation of simulation-based education to clinical practice.

Simulation-based education leads to decreased use of fluoroscopy in diagnostic coronary angiography.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to determine whether simulation-based education (SBE) translates into reduced procedure time, radiation, and contrast use in actual clinical care. BACKGROUND: As a high volume procedure often performed by novice cardiology fellows, diagnostic coronary angiography represents an excellent target for SBE. Reports of SBE in interventional cardiology are limited and there is little understanding of the potential downstream clinical impact of these interventions. METHODS: All diagnostic coronary angiograms performed at a single center between January 1, 2011 and June 30, 2015 were analyzed. Random effects linear regression models were used to compare outcomes between procedures performed by 12 cardiology fellows who underwent simulation-based training and those performed by 20 traditionally trained fellows. RESULTS: Thirty-two cardiology fellows performed 2,783 diagnostic coronary angiograms. Procedures performed by fellows trained with SBE were shorter (mean of 23.98 min vs. 24.94 min, P = 0.034) and were performed with decreased radiation (mean of 56,348 mGycm2 vs. 66,120 mGycm2 , P < 0.001). After controlling for year in training, procedure year, access site, and supervising attending physician, training on the simulator was independently associated with 117 fewer seconds of fluoroscopy time per procedure (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic coronary angiography SBE is associated with decreased use of fluoroscopy in downstream clinical care. SBE may be a useful tool to reduce radiation exposure in the cardiac catheterization laboratory.

Evaluation of a Mastery Learning Intervention on Hospitalists' Code Status Discussion Skills.

CONTEXT: Although code status discussions (CSD) occur frequently in the hospital setting, discussions often lack content necessary for informed decision making. Simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) has been used to improve clinical skills among resident physicians and may provide a novel way to improve hospitalists' CSD skills. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this pilot randomized controlled trial was to develop and evaluate a CSD SBML intervention for hospitalists. METHODS: Twenty hospitalists were randomized to control vs. a CSD SBML intervention. Hospitalists conducted a baseline standardized patient encounter (pretest) that was scored using a 19-item CSD checklist and controls completed a repeat standardized patient encounter six months later (post-test). Intervention group hospitalists received at least one two-hour training session featuring deliberate practice and feedback and were expected to meet a minimum passing score (MPS) on the post-test of 84% set by an expert panel. RESULTS: Only two of the 20 hospitalists met the MPS at pretest. Seventy percentage of intervention hospitalists achieved the MPS after a single training session. Post-test median checklist scores were higher for intervention hospitalists compared with controls (16.5 vs. 12.0, P = 0.0001). Intervention hospitalists were significantly more likely to ask about previous experiences with end-of-life decision making (70% vs. 20%, P = 0.03), explore values/goals (100% vs. 50%, P = 0.01), ask permission to make a recommendation regarding code status (60% vs. 0%, P = 0.003), and align recommendations with patient values/goals (90% vs. 40%, P = 0.02) than controls. CONCLUSION: Few hospitalists demonstrated mastery of CSD skills at baseline; SBML was an effective way to improve these skills.

Structured interdisciplinary rounds in a medical teaching unit: improving patient safety.

BACKGROUND: Effective collaboration and teamwork is essential to providing safe hospital care. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of an intervention designed to improve interdisciplinary collaboration and lower the rate of adverse events (AEs). METHODS: The study was a controlled trial of an intervention, Structured Inter-Disciplinary Rounds, implemented in 1 of 2 similar medical teaching units in a tertiary care academic hospital. The intervention combined a structured format for communication with a forum for regular interdisciplinary meetings. We conducted a retrospective medical record review evaluating 370 randomly selected patients admitted to the intervention and control units (n = 185 each) in the 24 weeks after and 185 admitted to the intervention unit in the 24 weeks before the implementation of Structured Inter-Disciplinary Rounds (N = 555). Medical records were screened for AEs. Two hospitalists confirmed the presence of AEs and assessed their preventability and severity in a masked fashion. We used multivariable Poisson regression models to compare the adjusted incidence of AEs in the intervention unit to that in concurrent and historic control units. RESULTS: The rate of AEs was 3.9 per 100 patient-days for the intervention unit compared with 7.2 and 7.7 per 100 patient-days, respectively, for the concurrent and historic control units (adjusted rate ratio, 0.54; P = .005; and 0.51; P = .001). The rate of preventable AEs was 0.9 per 100 patient-days for the intervention unit compared with 2.8 and 2.1 per 100 patient-days for the concurrent and historic control units (adjusted rate ratio, 0.27; P = .002; and 0.37; P = .02). The low number of AEs rated as serious or life-threatening precluded statistical analysis for differences in rates of events classified as serious or serious and preventable. CONCLUSION: Structured Inter-Disciplinary Rounds significantly reduced the adjusted rate of AEs in a medical teaching unit.

The association between night or weekend admission and hospitalization-relevant patient outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Nights and weekends represent a potentially high-risk time for hospitalized patients. Data regarding night or weekend admission and its impact on outcomes is limited. We studied the association between night or weekend admission and outcomes. METHODS: We reviewed 857 admissions to the general medicine services from the emergency department (ED) at our tertiary care hospital for demographic information, time and day of admission, and hospitalization-relevant outcomes (length of stay [LOS], hospital charges, intensive care unit [ICU] transfer during hospitalization, repeat ED visit within 30 days, readmission within 30 days, and poor outcome [ICU transfer, cardiac arrest, or death] within the first 24 hours of admission). Outcomes were compared between groups using univariate and multivariate modeling. RESULTS: Complete data for analysis were available for 824 patients. A total of 58% of patients were admitted at night and 22% were admitted during the weekend. Patients admitted at night as compared to those admitted during the day had similar a LOS (4.1 vs. 4.3, P = 0.38), hospital charges (25,200 vs. 27,500, P = 0.17), ICU transfer during hospitalization (3% vs. 6%, P = 0.06), 30 day repeat ED visit (22% vs. 20%, P = 0.42), 30 day readmission (20% vs. 17%, P = 0.23), and poor outcomes within 24 hours of admission (1% vs. 2%, P = 0.15). Patients admitted during the weekend as compared to those admitted during the week had lower hospital charges and lower likelihood of an ICU transfer but were otherwise similar. CONCLUSION: Night or weekend admission was not associated with worse hospitalization-relevant outcomes at our tertiary care hospital.