Training in basic gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) Position Statement.

This ESGE Position Statement provides structured and evidence-based guidance on the essential requirements and processes involved in training in basic gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures. The document outlines definitions; competencies required, and means to their assessment and maintenance; the structure and requirements of training programs; patient safety and medicolegal issues. 1: ESGE and ESGENA define basic endoscopic procedures as those procedures that are commonly indicated, generally accessible, and expected to be mastered (technically and cognitively) by the end of any core training program in gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2: ESGE and ESGENA consider the following as basic endoscopic procedures: diagnostic upper and lower GI endoscopy, as well as a limited range of interventions such as: tissue acquisition via cold biopsy forceps, polypectomy for lesions ≤ 10 mm, hemostasis techniques, enteral feeding tube placement, foreign body retrieval, dilation of simple esophageal strictures, and India ink tattooing of lesion location. 3: ESGE and ESGENA recommend that training in GI endoscopy should be subject to stringent formal requirements that ensure all ESGE key performance indicators (KPIs) are met. 4: Training in basic endoscopic procedures is a complex process and includes the development and acquisition of cognitive, technical/motor, and integrative skills. Therefore, ESGE and ESGENA recommend the use of validated tools to track the development of skills and assess competence. 5: ESGE and ESGENA recommend incorporating a multimodal approach to evaluating competence in basic GI endoscopic procedures, including procedural thresholds and the measurement and documentation of established ESGE KPIs. 7: ESGE and ESGENA recommend the continuous monitoring of ESGE KPIs during GI endoscopy training to ensure the trainee's maintenance of competence. 9: ESGE and ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy training units fulfil the ESGE KPIs for endoscopy units and, furthermore, be capable of providing the dedicated personnel, infrastructure, and sufficient case volume required for successful training within a structured training program. 10: ESGE and ESGENA recommend that trainers in basic GI endoscopic procedures should be endoscopists with formal educational training in the teaching of endoscopy, which allows them to successfully and safely teach trainees.

Perspectives and awareness of endoscopy healthcare professionals on sustainable practices in gastrointestinal endoscopy: results of the LEAFGREEN survey.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is one of healthcare's main contributors to climate change. We aimed to assess healthcare professionals' attitudes and the perceived barriers to implementation of sustainable GI endoscopy. METHODS: The LEAFGREEN web-based survey was a cross-sectional study conducted by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Green Endoscopy Working Group. The questionnaire comprised 39 questions divided into five sections (respondent demographics; climate change and sustainability beliefs; waste and resource management; single-use endoscopes and accessories; education and research). The survey was available via email to all active members of the ESGE and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) in March 2023. RESULTS: 407 respondents participated in the survey (11% response rate). Most participants (86%) agreed climate change is real and anthropogenic, but one-third did not consider GI endoscopy to be a significant contributor to climate change. Improvement in the appropriateness of endoscopic procedures (41%) and reduction in single-use accessories (34%) were considered the most important strategies to reduce the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. Respondents deemed lack of institutional support and knowledge from staff to be the main barriers to sustainable endoscopy. Strategies to reduce unnecessary GI endoscopic procedures and comparative studies of single-use versus reusable accessories were identified as research priorities. CONCLUSIONS: In this survey, ESGE and ESGENA members acknowledge climate change as a major threat to humanity. Further improvement in sustainability beliefs and professional attitudes, reduction in inappropriate GI endoscopy, and rational use of single-use accessories and endoscopes are critically required.

Reducing the environmental footprint of gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) Position Statement.

Climate change and the destruction of ecosystems by human activities are among the greatest challenges of the 21st century and require urgent action. Health care activities significantly contribute to the emission of greenhouse gases and waste production, with gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy being one of the largest contributors. This Position Statement aims to raise awareness of the ecological footprint of GI endoscopy and provides guidance to reduce its environmental impact. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) outline suggestions and recommendations for health care providers, patients, governments, and industry. MAIN STATEMENTS 1: GI endoscopy is a resource-intensive activity with a significant yet poorly assessed environmental impact. 2: ESGE-ESGENA recommend adopting immediate actions to reduce the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. 3: ESGE-ESGENA recommend adherence to guidelines and implementation of audit strategies on the appropriateness of GI endoscopy to avoid the environmental impact of unnecessary procedures. 4: ESGE-ESGENA recommend the embedding of reduce, reuse, and recycle programs in the GI endoscopy unit. 5: ESGE-ESGENA suggest that there is an urgent need to reassess and reduce the environmental and economic impact of single-use GI endoscopic devices. 6: ESGE-ESGENA suggest against routine use of single-use GI endoscopes. However, their use could be considered in highly selected patients on a case-by-case basis. 7: ESGE-ESGENA recommend inclusion of sustainability in the training curricula of GI endoscopy and as a quality domain. 8: ESGE-ESGENA recommend conducting high quality research to quantify and minimize the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. 9: ESGE-ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy companies assess, disclose, and audit the environmental impact of their value chain. 10:  ESGE-ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy should become a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions practice by 2050.

[Interprofessional knowledge and skills training of the insertion technique for the PEG placement on simulators - development and testing of a national curriculum for physicians and nurses]. / Interprofessionelles Wissens- und Skillstraining der PEG-Anlage an Simulatoren ­ Entwicklung und Testung eines nationalen Curriculums für Ärzte und spezialisierte Pflegende.

INTRODUCTION: Expert opinion within the field of gastroenterology mandates a national training curriculum to be completed prior to performing a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG).The goal of the present study is both the development and evaluation of such a curriculum, thus aiming to provide physicians and nurses with the necessary knowledge and skills to safely perform the PEG procedure. METHODS: Testing was performed using a non-randomized, interventional pilot study on simulators. This included a: (1) preparatory, (2) theoretical, and (3) practical phase. Following the theoretical phase, cognitive skills were assessed with a knowledge test. During the practical phase, each participant's puncture procedure was recorded with a multi-channel video, and sensorimotor skills were evaluated with an assessment instrument (AS-PEG). Finally, participant satisfaction was evaluated using a questionnaire. RESULTS: Seven physicians and 17 nurses completed all phases and final examinations, as defined in the curriculum. An average of 70.3 ±â€Š3.7 (61-75) of 76 points and 37.1 ±â€Š2.1 (32-40) of 42 points were achieved in the knowledge and acquired sensorimotor skills tests, respectively. Overall, the evaluation revealed a high level of satisfaction among the participants with respect to content, achievement of learning objectives, and acquired practical skills. CONCLUSION: Dissemination of the curriculum is deemed useful and necessary to provide the theoretical and practical knowledge for physicians and nurses through a structured inter-professional knowledge and skills-training format and to offer nurses a legally secure framework.

ESGE and ESGENA Position Statement on gastrointestinal endoscopy and the COVID-19 pandemic.

We are currently living in the throes of the COVID-19 pandemic that imposes a significant stress on health care providers and facilities. Europe is severely affected with an exponential increase in incident infections and deaths. The clinical manifestations of COVID-19 can be subtle, encompassing a broad spectrum from asymptomatic mild disease to severe respiratory illness. Health care professionals in endoscopy units are at increased risk of infection from COVID-19. Infection prevention and control has been shown to be dramatically effective in assuring the safety of both health care professionals and patients. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (www.esge.com) and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (www.esgena.org) are joining forces to provide guidance during this pandemic to help assure the highest level of endoscopy care and protection against COVID-19 for both patients and endoscopy unit personnel. This guidance is based upon the best available evidence regarding assessment of risk during the current status of the pandemic and a consensus on which procedures to perform and the priorities on resumption. We appreciate the gaps in knowledge and evidence, especially on the proper strategy(ies) for the resumption of normal endoscopy practice during the upcoming phases and end of the pandemic and therefore a list of potential research questions is presented. New evidence may result in an updated statement.

Reprocessing of flexible endoscopes and endoscopic accessories used in gastrointestinal endoscopy: Position Statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) - Update 2018.

This Position Statement from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and the European Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) sets standards for the reprocessing of flexible endoscopes and endoscopic devices used in gastroenterology. An expert working group of gastroenterologists, endoscopy nurses, chemists, microbiologists, and industry representatives provides updated recommendations on all aspects of reprocessing in order to maintain hygiene and infection control.

[Comparison of safety insertion techniques of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in nurses and physicians - a non-randomized interventional pilot study on a simulation model]. / Vergleich der Sicherheit der perkutan gastralen Punktion im Rahmen der PEG-Anlage zwischen Ärzten und spezialisierten Pflegenden ­ eine nicht randomisierte, interventionelle Pilotstudie an Simulatoren.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) insertion represents a standardized procedure for enteral nutrition in patients with long-term eating difficulties for various reasons. In a clinical setting, delegation of stomach puncture and placement of a PEG tube, within the context of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy amongst nurses, occurs. In Germany, there are no studies yet showing the differences between physicians and nurses regarding the safety of percutaneous stomach puncture.In a non-randomized quasi-experimental interventional study on a simulation model, the safety of stomach puncture within the context of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy between physicians and nurses with special training was compared. Technical skills were recorded with video cameras and provided the basis for the following analysis. The study contained: (1) a theoretical preparation phase, (2) training on simulation model and a repeated practice of the skills, and (3) stomach puncture on the simulation model. The actions were recorded with a multichannel video technique. As part of the concept, nurses and physicians were trained together in theory and practice. The analysis was conducted with the newly designed Assessment Instrument Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (AS-PEG). Seven physicians and 17 nurses took part in the pilot study. On average, the physicians reached a score of 36.4 ±â€Š2.2 (33 - 39) and nurses 37.4 ±â€Š2 (32 - 40), while the maximum score was 42. The evaluation of technical skills on the recorded videos by means of Assessment Instrument Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (AS-PEG) showed no tendency to significant differences between physicians and nurses after theoretical and practical training. The study contributes a first objective evaluation of technical skills on stomach puncture within the context of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with the newly designed AS-PEG.

Prevention of multidrug-resistant infections from contaminated duodenoscopes: Position Statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates (ESGENA).

Patients should be informed about the benefits and risks of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)Only specially trained and competent personnel should carry out endoscope reprocessing.Manufacturers of duodenoscopes should provide detailed instructions on how to use and reprocess their equipment.In the case of modifications to their equipment, manufacturers should provide updated instructions for use.Detailed reprocessing protocols based on the manufacturer's instructions for use should clearly lay out the different reprocessing steps necessary for each endoscope model.Appropriate cleaning equipment should be used for duodenoscopes in compliance with the manufacturer's instructions for use. Only purpose-designed, endoscope type-specific, single-use cleaning brushes should be used, to ensure optimal cleaning. As soon as the endoscope is withdrawn from the patient, bedside cleaning should be performed, followed by leak testing, thorough manual cleaning steps, and automated reprocessing, in order to: · Remove debris from external and internal surfaces;. · Prevent any drying of body fluids, blood, or debris;. · Prevent any formation of biofilms.. In addition to the leak test, visual inspection of the distal end as well as regular maintenance of duodenoscopes should be performed according to the manufacturer's instructions for use, in order to detect any damage at an early stage.The entire reprocessing procedure in endoscope washer-disinfectors (EWDs) should be validated according to the European and International Standard, EN ISO 15883. Routine technical tests of EWDs should be performed according to the validation reports.Microbiological surveillance of a proportion of the department's endoscopes should be performed every 3 months, with the requirement that all endoscopes used in the unit are tested at least once a year.In the case of suspected endoscopy-related infection, the relevant device (e. g., endoscope, EWD) should be taken out of service until adequate corrective actions have been taken. Outbreaks should be managed by a multidisciplinary team, including endoscopy, hygiene, and microbiology experts, manufacturers, and regulatory bodies, according to national standards and/or laws. In the case of suspected multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) outbreaks, close cooperation between the endoscopy unit and the clinical health provider is essential (including infection control departments and hospital hygienists).

ESGE-ESGENA technical specification for process validation and routine testing of endoscope reprocessing in washer-disinfectors according to EN ISO 15883, parts 1, 4, and ISO/TS 15883-5.

1 Prerequisites. The clinical service provider should obtain confirmation from the endoscope washer-disinfector (EWD) manufacturer that all endoscopes intended to be used can be reprocessed in the EWD. 2 Installation qualification. This can be performed by different parties but national guidelines should define who has the responsibilities, taking into account legal requirements. 3 Operational qualification. This should include parametric tests to verify that the EWD is working according to its specifications. 4 Performance qualification. Testing of cleaning performance, microbiological testing of routinely used endoscopes, and the quality of the final rinse water should be considered in all local guidelines. The extent of these tests depends on local requirements. According to the results of type testing performed during EWD development, other parameters can be tested if local regulatory authorities accept this. Chemical residues on endoscope surfaces should be searched for, if acceptable test methods are available. 5 Routine inspections. National guidelines should consider both technical and performance criteria. Individual risk analyses performed in the validation and requalification processes are helpful for defining appropriate test frequencies for routine inspections.

Development and Pilot Validation of an Instrument Assessing Sensorimotor Skills for Percutaneous Gastral Puncture.

INTRODUCTION: The acquisition of sensorimotor skills, so-called "technical skills", plays an essential part in the professional and continuing educational training of medical and nursing staff. Facilities turn to simulator training to promote the safe and accurate performance of endoscopic examinations. Thus, this study aimed to develop and pilot-test a corresponding assessment instrument to monitor necessary sensorimotor or "technical" skills of the examiner for a safe percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (AS-PEG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Instrument development and pilot validation involved four stages: identification of potential items and initial draft of the AS-PEG; expert panel with 11 experts (content validity index [CVI] calculated); empirical validation using a quasi-experimental intervention on simulators; revision of the pilot AS-PEG taking expert assessment, and empirical testing into consideration. RESULTS: The initial instrument yielded 13 categories and 44 items describing the PEG procedure. Experts rated 30 out of 44 items (68%) extremely or very important for the safety of the puncture of the stomach. Initial item-CVIs ranged from 0.00 to 1.00; scale-CVI was 0.61. Twenty-four trainees (7 physicians, 17 nurses) participated in the pilot simulation study. On average, 8:25 min were required for PEG placement (min-max 5:59-13:38 min, SD = 1:43). The revised AS-PEG version was reduced to 14 items with a range of the item CVI from 0.8 to 1.0, and a scale-CVI of 0.90. CONCLUSION: The AS-PEG instrument facilitates the evaluation of sensorimotor skills during percutaneous gastric puncture procedures within the context of PEG placement, across professions and without relating to the number of procedures previously performed. The instrument is economical and shows satisfying content validity.

Diagnosis and treatment of neurogenic dysphagia - S1 guideline of the German Society of Neurology.

INTRODUCTION: Neurogenic dysphagia defines swallowing disorders caused by diseases of the central and peripheral nervous system, neuromuscular transmission, or muscles. Neurogenic dysphagia is one of the most common and at the same time most dangerous symptoms of many neurological diseases. Its most important sequelae include aspiration pneumonia, malnutrition and dehydration, and affected patients more often require long-term care and are exposed to an increased mortality. Based on a systematic pubmed research of related original papers, review articles, international guidelines and surveys about the diagnostics and treatment of neurogenic dysphagia, a consensus process was initiated, which included dysphagia experts from 27 medical societies. RECOMMENDATIONS: This guideline consists of 53 recommendations covering in its first part the whole diagnostic spectrum from the dysphagia specific medical history, initial dysphagia screening and clinical assessment, to more refined instrumental procedures, such as flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing, the videofluoroscopic swallowing study and high-resolution manometry. In addition, specific clinical scenarios are captured, among others the management of patients with nasogastric and tracheotomy tubes. The second part of this guideline is dedicated to the treatment of neurogenic dysphagia. Apart from dietary interventions and behavioral swallowing treatment, interventions to improve oral hygiene, pharmacological treatment options, different modalities of neurostimulation as well as minimally invasive and surgical therapies are dealt with. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis and treatment of neurogenic dysphagia is challenging and requires a joined effort of different medical professions. While the evidence supporting the implementation of dysphagia screening is rather convincing, further trials are needed to improve the quality of evidence for more refined methods of dysphagia diagnostics and, in particular, the different treatment options of neurogenic dysphagia. The present article is an abridged and translated version of the guideline recently published online ( https://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/030-111l_Neurogene-Dysphagie_2020-05.pdf ).

Hygiene: The Looming Achilles Heel in Endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Since the late 1970s there have been sporadic reports of nosocomial infections linked to endoscopic procedures. Infections by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) have an increasing impact on healthcare systems worldwide. Since 2010 outbreaks involving MDRO have been reported as a result of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) from the USA, France, Germany and the Netherlands. METHODS: This article evaluates the recent outbreaks and developments and demonstrates a structural approach to how to prevent future infections. Current national and international guidelines were used as a basis for discussions. RESULTS: In some cases insufficient cleaning or drying supported the outbreak. In the majority of cases, outbreaks occurred despite the apparently appropriate reprocessing protocols being in use. Microlesions were identified on a number of endoscopes, which supported the growth of bacteria and represented a vehicle for the transmission of infectious material. National official bodies responded with warnings. Manufacturers informed their customers accordingly. Separate, purpose-designed reprocessing rooms and a sufficient number of competent staff provide the structural quality for a safe reprocessing. The process quality includes a thorough cleaning of all endoscope channels and crucial instrument components, followed by an automated and validated reprocessing procedure. Strict adherence to manufacturers' recommendations is essential. The outcome quality should be evaluated by regular audits, validation of reprocessing procedures and microbiological surveillance. If outbreaks occur, a close co-operation with official bodies and manufacturers is essential. CONCLUSION: Health care professionals and manufacturers should be aware of their responsibility to ensure patient safety. A structural approach is key in prevention of endoscopy-associated infections.