Training and assessment in flexible sigmoidoscopy: using a novel direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) assessment tool.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data supporting milestone development during flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) training are lacking. We aimed to present validity evidence for our formative direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) assessment in FS, and use DOPS to establish competency benchmarks and define learning curves for a national training cohort. METHODS: This prospective UK-wide (211 centres) study included all FS formative DOPS assessments submitted to the national e-portfolio. Reliability was estimated from generalisability theory analysis. Item and global DOPS scores were correlated with lifetime procedure count to study learning curves, with competency benchmarks defined using contrasting groups analysis. Multivariable binary logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors of DOPS competence. RESULTS: This analysis included 3,616 DOPS submitted for 468 trainees. From generalisability analysis, sources of overall competency score variance included: trainee ability (27%), assessor stringency (15%), assessor subjectivity attributable to the trainee (18%) and case-to-case variation (40%), which enabled the modelling of reliability estimates. The competency benchmark (mean DOPS score: 3.84) was achieved after 150-174 procedures. Across the cohort, competency development occurred in the order of: pre-procedural (50-74), non-technical (75-149), technical (125-174) and post-procedural (175-199) skills. Lifetime procedural count (p<0.001), case difficulty (p<0.001), and lifetime formative DOPS count (p=0.001) were independently associated with DOPS competence, but not trainee or assessor specialty. CONCLUSION: Sigmoidoscopy DOPS can provide valid and reliable assessments of competency during training and can be used to chart competency development. Contrary to earlier studies, based on destination-orientated endpoints, overall competency in sigmoidoscopy was attained after 150 lifetime procedures.

Changes in scoring of Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) forms and the impact on competence assessment.

BACKGROUND: Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) is an established competence assessment tool in endoscopy. In July 2016, the DOPS scoring format changed from a performance-based scale to a supervision-based scale. We aimed to evaluate the impact of changes to the DOPS scale format on the distribution of scores in novice trainees and on competence assessment. METHODS: We performed a prospective, multicenter (n = 276), observational study of formative DOPS assessments in endoscopy trainees with ≤ 100 lifetime procedures. DOPS were submitted in the 6-months before July 2016 (old scale) and after (new scale) for gastroscopy (n = 2998), sigmoidoscopy (n = 1310), colonoscopy (n = 3280), and polypectomy (n = 631). Scores for old and new DOPS were aligned to a 4-point scale and compared. RESULTS: 8219 DOPS (43 % new and 57 % old) submitted for 1300 trainees were analyzed. Compared with old DOPS, the use of the new DOPS was associated with greater utilization of the lowest score (2.4 % vs. 0.9 %; P < 0.001), broader range of scores, and a reduction in competent scores (60.8 % vs. 86.9 %; P < 0.001). The reduction in competent scores was evident on subgroup analysis across all procedure types (P < 0.001) and for each quartile of endoscopy experience. The new DOPS was superior in characterizing the endoscopy learning curve by demonstrating progression of competent scores across quartiles of procedural experience. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy assessors applied a greater range of scores using the new DOPS scale based on degree of supervision in two cohorts of trainees matched for experience. Our study provides construct validity evidence in support of the new scale format.

The cost-effectiveness of training US primary care physicians to conduct colorectal cancer screening in family medicine residency programs.

BACKGROUND: Demand for a wide array of colorectal cancer screening strategies continues to outpace supply. One strategy to reduce this deficit is to dramatically increase the number of primary care physicians who are trained and supportive of performing office-based colonoscopies or flexible sigmoidoscopies. This study evaluates the clinical and economic implications of training primary care physicians via family medicine residency programs to offer colorectal cancer screening services as an in-office procedure. METHODS: Using previously established clinical and economic assumptions from existing literature and budget data from a local grant (2013), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are calculated that incorporate the costs of a proposed national training program and subsequent improvements in patient compliance. Sensitivity analyses are also conducted. RESULTS: Baseline assumptions suggest that the intervention would produce 2394 newly trained residents who could perform 71,820 additional colonoscopies or 119,700 additional flexible sigmoidoscopies after ten years. Despite high costs associated with the national training program, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios remain well below standard willingness-to-pay thresholds under base case assumptions. Interestingly, the status quo hierarchy of preferred screening strategies is disrupted by the proposed intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A national overhaul of family medicine residency programs offering training for colorectal cancer screening yields satisfactory incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. However, the model places high expectations on primary care physicians to improve current compliance levels in the US.

Flexible fiberoptic sigmoidoscopy. Logistics and economics of office use.

Early detection of colorectal cancer, followed by surgical excision, can effect a cure in 50% of patients. The flexible fiberoptic sigmoidoscope enables identification of lesions in the premalignant or early malignant stages. Its use is cost-effective in any practice that includes more than 200 to 300 patients over age 50, and the procedure is well accepted by patients. Available options for learning the technique are listed, along with their approximate fees. The author explores all considerations pertinent to instituting this screening procedure and suggests the best way to introduce sigmoidoscopy into the established office routine.

The long and short of flexible sigmoidoscopy: does it matter?

Physicians performing fiberoptic sigmoidoscopy may choose between a 35 and 60 cm instrument. Confusion and dispute exist concerning the advantages of one over the other. In an effort to resolve this question, 100 consecutive symptomatic patients were examined in an outpatient sigmoidoscopy clinic. Both the Olympus OSF-30 and Olympus OSF-60 flexible sigmoidoscopes were used on each patient alternately. Mean examination time, patient tolerance, diagnostic findings, instrument cost, physician training time, and insertion length were recorded and compared. The longer scope detected five more polyps and 25 additional cases of diverticulosis which were located beyond the reach of the shorter scope. The increased number of findings with the longer scope was expected; however, the increased number of polyps was not statistically significant. The additional number of findings with the longer scope was expected and with increased number of examinations the increased number of polyps may prove to be statistically significant. Neither instrument can substitute for colonoscopy in the overall management of colorectal neoplasms. We conclude that with adequate training and cost control, either instrument can be used for screening proctosigmoidoscopy; but the trend suggests a greater number of polyps are detected with the longer instrument.

Training in sigmoidoscopy. An assessment in three teaching hospitals.

To assess the standard of training in postgraduate sigmoidoscopy in Melbourne, a questionnaire was prepared and distributed to resident medical officers (RMOs) in three teaching hospitals. The survey showed that practical instruction in technique is inadequate, and that most individuals perform too few sigmoidoscopies to become competent at either examining or recognizing lesions. A substantial number of RMOs had never seen common and important lesions such as polyps or colorectal cancer. Most RMOs considered their training to be poor and stated that they lacked confidence in their ability to perform sigmoidoscopy. The current training programme needs detailed reassessment and improvement.