Systematic literature review of learning curves for colorectal polyp resection techniques in lower gastrointestinal endoscopy.

AIM: The performance of therapeutic procedures in lower gastrointestinal endoscopy (LGI) can be challenging and carries an increased risk of adverse events. There is increasing demand for the training of endoscopists in these procedures, but limited guidelines exist concerning procedural competency. The aim of this study was to assess the learning curves for LGI polypectomy, colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). METHOD: A systematic review of electronic databases between 1946 and September 2019 was performed. Citations were included if they reported learning curve data. Outcome measures that defined the success of procedural competency were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 34 out of 598 studies met the inclusion criteria of which 28 were related to ESD, three to polypectomy and three to EMR. Outcome measures for polypectomy competency (en bloc resection, delayed bleeding and independent polypectomy rate) were achieved after completion of between 250 and 400 polypectomies and after 300 colonoscopies. EMR outcome measures, including complete resection and recurrence, were achieved variably between 50 and 300 procedures. Outcome measures for ESD included efficiency (resection rates and procedural speed) and safety (adverse events). En bloc resection rates of over 80% and R0 resection rates of over 70% were achieved at 20-40 cases and procedural speed increased after 30 ESD cases. Competency in safety metrics was variably achieved at 20-200 cases. CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of data on learning curves in LGI polypectomy, EMR and ESD. Despite limited evidence, we have identified relevant outcome measures and threshold numbers for the most common LGI polyp resection techniques for potential inclusion in training programmes/credentialing guidelines.

Evaluation of an early-stage innovation for full-thickness excision of benign colonic polyps using the IDEAL framework.

AIMS: Colectomy is the current approach for patients with endoscopically unresectable benign polyps but risks considerable morbidity. Full-thickness laparoendoscopic excision (FLEX) is a novel procedure, specifically developed to treat endoscopically unresectable benign colonic polyps, which could reduce the treatment burden of the current approach and improve outcomes. However, traditional evaluations of surgical innovations lack methodological rigour. This study reports the development and feasibility of the FLEX procedure in selected patients. METHOD: A prospective development study using the Idea, Development, Evaluation, Assessment, Long-term study (IDEAL) framework was undertaken, by one surgeon, of the FLEX procedure in selected patients with endoscopically unresectable benign colonic polyps. Three-dimensional (3D)-CT colonography reconstructions were used preoperatively to rehearse patient-specific, critical manoeuvres. Targetted, full-thickness excision was performed: after marking the margin of the caecal polyp using circumferential endoscopic argon plasma coagulation, transmural endoscopic sutures were used to evert the bowel and resection was undertaken by laparoscopic linear stapling. Feasibility outcomes (establishing 'local success') included evidence of complete polyp resection without adverse events (especially safe closure of the excision site). RESULTS: Ten patients [median (interquartile range) age: 74 (59-78) years] with polyp median diameters of 35 (30-41) mm, were referred for and consented to receive the FLEX procedure. During the same time frame, no patient underwent colectomy for benign polyps. One further patient received FLEX for local excision of a presumed malignant polyp because severe comorbidity prohibited standard procedures. The FLEX procedure was successfully performed locally, with complete resection of the polyp and safe closure of the excision site, in eight patients. Three noncompleted procedures were converted to laparoscopic segmental colectomy under the same anaesthetic because of endoscopic inaccessibility (two patients) and transcolonic suture failure (one patient). CONCLUSIONS: The FLEX procedure is still under development. Early data demonstrate that it is safe for excision of selected benign polyps. Modifications to transcolonic suture delivery are now required and there is a need for wider adoption before more definitive evaluation can be performed.

A pilot study to assess near infrared laparoscopy with indocyanine green (ICG) for intraoperative sentinel lymph node mapping in early colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous attempts at sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping in colon cancer have been compromised by ineffective tracers and the inclusion of advanced disease. This study evaluated the feasibility of fluorescence detection of SLNs with indocyanine green (ICG) for lymphatic mapping in T1/T2 clinically staged colonic malignancy. METHODS: Consecutive patients with clinical T1/T2 stage colon cancer underwent endoscopic peritumoral submucosal injection of indocyanine green (ICG) for fluorescence detection of SLN using a near-infrared (NIR) camera. All patients underwent laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision surgery. Detection rate and sensitivity of the NIR-ICG technique were the study endpoints. RESULTS: Thirty patients mean age = 68 years [range = 38-80], mean BMI = 26.2 (IQR = 24.7-28.6) were studied. Mesocolic sentinel nodes (median = 3/patient) were detected by fluorescence within the standard resection field in 27/30 patients. Overall, ten patients had lymph node metastases, with one of these patients having a failed SLN procedure. Of the 27 patients with completed SLN mapping, nine patients had histologically positive lymph nodes containing malignancy. 3/9 had positive SLNs with 6 false negatives. In five of these false negative patients, tumours were larger than 35 mm with four also being T3/T4. CONCLUSION: ICG mapping with NIR fluorescence allowed mesenteric detection of SLNs in clinical T1/T2 stage colonic cancer. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: ID: NCT01662752.

An international survey of polypectomy training and assessment.

Background and study aims Colonic polypectomy is acknowledged to be a technically challenging part of colonoscopy. Training in polypectomy is recognized to be often inconsistent. This study aimed to ascertain worldwide practice in polypectomy training. Patients and methods An electronic survey was distributed to endoscopic trainees and trainers in 19 countries asking about their experiences of receiving and delivering training. Participants were also asked about whether formal polypectomy training guidance existed in their country. Results Data were obtained from 610 colonoscopists. Of these responses, 348 (57.0 %) were from trainers and 262 (43.0 %) from trainees; 6.6 % of trainers assessed competency once per year or less often. Just over half (53.1 %) of trainees had ever had their polypectomy technique formally assessed by any trainer. Approximately half the trainees surveyed (51.1 %) stated that the principles of polypectomy had only ever been taught to them intermittently. Of those trainees with the most colonoscopy experience, who had performed over 500 procedures, 48.2 % had had training on removing large polyps of over 10 mm; 46.2 % (121 respondents) of trainees surveyed held no record of the polypectomies they had performed. Only four of the 19 countries surveyed had specific guidelines on polypectomy training. Conclusions A significant number of competent colonoscopists have never been taught how to perform polypectomy. Training guidelines worldwide generally give little direction as to how trainees should acquire polypectomy skills. The learning curve for polypectomy needs to be defined to provide reliable guidance on how to train colonoscopists in this skill.

Report of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/British Society of Gastroenterology Colorectal Polyp Working Group: the development of a complex colorectal polyp minimum dataset.

AIM: The management of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) is complex, with widespread variation in management and outcome, even amongst experienced clinicians. Variations in the assessment and decision-making processes are likely to be a major factor in this variability. The creation of a standardized minimum dataset to aid decision-making may therefore result in improved clinical management. METHOD: An official working group of 13 multidisciplinary specialists was appointed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) to develop a minimum dataset on LNPCPs. The literature review used to structure the ACPGBI/BSG guidelines for the management of LNPCPs was used by a steering subcommittee to identify various parameters pertaining to the decision-making processes in the assessment and management of LNPCPs. A modified Delphi consensus process was then used for voting on proposed parameters over multiple voting rounds with at least 80% agreement defined as consensus. The minimum dataset was used in a pilot process to ensure rigidity and usability. RESULTS: A 23-parameter minimum dataset with parameters relating to patient and lesion factors, including six parameters relating to image retrieval, was formulated over four rounds of voting with two pilot processes to test rigidity and usability. CONCLUSION: This paper describes the development of the first reported evidence-based and expert consensus minimum dataset for the management of LNPCPs. It is anticipated that this dataset will allow comprehensive and standardized lesion assessment to improve decision-making in the assessment and management of LNPCPs.

British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctologists of Great Britain and Ireland guidelines for the management of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps

These guidelines provide an evidence-based framework for the management of patients with large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs), in addition to identifying key performance indicators (KPIs) that permit the audit of quality outcomes. These are areas not previously covered by British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Guidelines.A National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant BSG guideline development process was used throughout and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to structure the guideline development process. A systematic review of literature was conducted for English language articles up to May 2014 concerning the assessment and management of LNPCPs. Quality of evaluated studies was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Methodology Checklist System. Proposed recommendation statements were evaluated by each member of the Guideline Development Group (GDG) on a scale from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree) with >80% agreement required for consensus to be reached. Where consensus was not reached a modified Delphi process was used to re-evaluate and modify proposed statements until consensus was reached or the statement discarded. A round table meeting was subsequently held to finalise recommendations and to evaluate the strength of evidence discussed. The GRADE tool was used to assess the strength of evidence and strength of recommendation for finalised statements.KPIs, a training framework and potential research questions for the management of LNPCPs were also developed. It is hoped that these guidelines will improve the assessment and management of LNPCPs.

Implementation of an endoscopy safety checklist.

Patient safety and quality improvement are increasingly prioritised across all areas of healthcare. Errors in endoscopy are common but often inconsequential and therefore go uncorrected. A series of minor errors, however, may culminate in a significant adverse event. This is unsurprising given the rising volume and complexity of cases coupled with shift working patterns. There is a growing body of evidence to suggest that surgical safety checklists can prevent errors and thus positively impact on patient morbidity and mortality. Consequently, surgical checklists are mandatory for all procedures. Many UK hospitals are mandating the use of similar checklists for endoscopy. There is no guidance on how best to implement endoscopy checklists nor any measure of their usefulness in endoscopy. This article outlines lessons learnt from innovating service delivery in our unit.

The endoscopist's guide to serrated polyposis.

AIM: Serrated polyposis is a condition of the colon characterized by multiple serrated polyps. This review aims to provide a practical guide to the day-to-day management of serrated polyposis, including diagnosis, endoscopic identification of serrated polyps, surveillance, the role of endoscopic and surgical management and the screening of family members. METHOD: The literature was searched using PubMed and MEDLINE databases for the terms "serrated polyp", "serrated polyposis" and "hyperplastic polyposis". English-language abstracts were read and the full article was retrieved if relevant to the review. Expert opinion from the authors was also sought. RESULTS: Advances in our knowledge of the molecular pathways involved in serrated polyposis and an improved clinical picture of the disease from retrospective studies have led to better understanding of its pathogenesis and natural history. However, there are still areas not answered by the literature, and hence empirical management or expert opinion has to be followed. CONCLUSION: Improvements in our understanding of serrated polyposis, together with improvements in endoscopic equipment and technique, have enabled the endoscopist to be at the forefront of managing this condition from diagnosis to endoscopic surveillance and control of the polyps.

A novel method for determining the difficulty of colonoscopic polypectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopists are now expected to perform polypectomy routinely. Colonic polypectomy varies in difficulty, depending on polyp morphology, size, location and access. The measurement of the degree of difficulty of polypectomy, based on polyp characteristics, has not previously been described. OBJECTIVE: To define the level of difficulty of polypectomy. METHODS: Consensus by nine endoscopists regarding parameters that determine the complexity of a polyp was achieved through the Delphi method. The endoscopists then assigned a polyp complexity level to each possible combination of parameters. A scoring system to measure the difficulty level of a polyp was developed and validated by two different expert endoscopists. RESULTS: Through two Delphi rounds, four factors for determining the complexity of a polypectomy were identified: size (S), morphology (M), site (S) and access (A). A scoring system was established, based on size (1-9 points), morphology (1-3 points), site (1-2 points) and access (1-3 points). Four polyp levels (with increasing level of complexity) were identified based on the range of scores obtained: level I (4-5), level II (6-9), level III (10-12) and level IV (>12). There was a high degree of interrater reliability for the polyp scores (interclass correlation coefficient of 0.93) and levels (κ=0.888). CONCLUSIONS: The scoring system is feasible and reliable. Defining polyp complexity levels may be useful for planning training, competency assessment and certification in colonoscopic polypectomy. This may allow for more efficient service delivery and referral pathways.

The first 3 years of national bowel cancer screening at a single UK tertiary centre.

AIM: St Mark's Bowel Cancer Screening Centre commenced screening in October 2006 as a contributor to the national programme. The first 35 months' experience is reported. METHOD: Individuals with a positive faecal occult blood test (FOBT) were offered colonoscopy or alternatives if they had significant comorbidity. All screening data were collected prospectively. RESULTS: Of the 98 815 FOBT kits issued, 42 523 were returned (43% uptake; 20.79% men). In total, 1339/1488 (90%) FOBT-positive participants attended the nurse clinic (57% men). Of these, 1057 had an index colonoscopy, 115 had a computed tomography colonoscopy (CTC) and eight had a flexible sigmoidoscopy. Five hundred and seventeen (44%) procedures were 'normal' (no polyps/cancers). Eighty (6%) individuals had colorectal cancer. The polyp detection rate in index procedures, including colonoscopy, CTC and flexible sigmoidoscopy, was 50%. The adenoma detection rate of all colonoscopies was 62.8%. The median polyp size was 5 (1-80) mm. In total, 1200 colonoscopies were performed by five accredited colonoscopists (96% completion rate). There were 13 (1%) adverse events with < 1 in 500 patients undergoing polypectomy requiring a transfusion. There was one 30-day postsurgical mortality, one perforation and no colonoscopy-related mortality. Almost all 39/40 (97%) patients in the BCS programme felt that the findings were adequately explained compared with 21/32 (64%) elective patients (P < 0.001) within the same unit. CONCLUSIONS: At this bowel cancer screening single centre, colonoscopy completion rates were high (unadjusted caecal intubation rate of 96%) and complication rates were low. In contrast to other published data, the uptake and cancer-detection rates were lower.

What is the most reliable imaging modality for small colonic polyp characterization? Study of white-light, autofluorescence, and narrow-band imaging.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: In vivo optical diagnosis of small colorectal polyps has potential clinical and cost advantages, but requires accuracy and high interobserver agreement for clinically acceptability. We aimed to assess interobserver variability and diagnostic performance of endoscopic imaging modalities in characterizing small colonic polyps. METHODS: High quality still images of 80 polyps < 1 cm were recorded using white-light endoscopy (WLE), autofluorescence imaging (AFI) and narrow-band imaging with and without magnification (NBI and NBImag). All images were assessed for quality, prediction of polyp histology, and vascular pattern intensity (with NBI) by nine experienced colonoscopists (four experts in advanced imaging) from five UK centers. Interobserver agreement (kappa statistic), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated compared with histopathological findings. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement for predicting polyp histology using NBImag was significantly better for experts (κ = 0.63, substantial) compared with nonexperts (κ = 0.30, fair; P < 0.001), and was moderate for all colonoscopists with WLE, AFI and NBI. Interobserver agreement for vascular pattern intensity using NBI was 0.69 (substantial) for experts and 0.57 (good) for nonexperts. NBImag had higher sensitivity than WLE (experts, 0.93 vs. 0.68, P < 0.001; nonexperts, 0.90 vs. 0.52, P < 0.001) and higher overall accuracy (experts, 0.76 vs. 0.64, P = 0.003; nonexperts 0.61 vs. 0.40, P < 0.001). AFI had worse accuracy than WLE for both expert colonoscopists (0.53 vs. 0.64, P = 0.02) and nonexperts (0.32 vs. 0.40, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Of the imaging modalities tested, NBImag appeared to have the best overall accuracy and interobserver agreement, although not adequate for in vivo diagnosis. NBI and AFI did not have better sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy compared with WLE.

CT colonography training for radiographers--a formal evaluation.

AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy of a new intensive "hands-on" course designed to train small teams of radiographers in computed tomography colonography (CTC) technique and initial interpretation for patient triage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The course comprised small-group lectures, active participation in the daily CTC service with practical technique and image interpretation training by experienced radiologists and radiographers. Evaluation was by assessment of knowledge using randomized sets of multiple choice questions (MCQ; pre/post-course), practical technique using checklists and expert global scores, and interpretation performance outcomes using randomized pre/post-course test datasets (five validated CTC examinations each). Paired t-tests were used to investigate change in performance for MCQ score and interpretation accuracy. RESULTS: Thirteen courses with 49 participants were evaluated over 2 years. Practical skills were high, with mean (SD) checklist scores of 14/15 (0.85) and global scores of 26/30 (2.3). MCQ scores increased significantly from a mean of 59% pre-course to 69% post-course, p<0.001. Correct classification of CTC examination improved significantly from a mean of 55% pre-course to 71% post-course, p<0.001. Cancer and large polyp (>10mm) detection rates also improved significantly from 49% to 60%, p=0.002. CONCLUSION: Structured training in CTC can significantly improve knowledge and interpretation skills of radiographers, while assessing safe procedural performance. Implementation of similar programmes nationally may help reduce performance gaps between centres.

Validation of the second-generation Olympus colonoscopy simulator for skills assessment.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Simulators have potential value in providing objective evidence of technical skill for procedures within medicine. The aim of this study was to determine face and construct validity for the Olympus colonoscopy simulator and to establish which assessment measures map to clinical benchmarks of expertise. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-four participants were recruited: 10 novices with no prior colonoscopy experience, 13 intermediate (trainee) endoscopists with fewer than 1000 previous colonoscopies, and 11 experienced endoscopists with more than 1000 previous colonoscopies. All participants completed three standardized cases on the simulator and experts gave feedback regarding the realism of the simulator. Forty metrics recorded automatically by the simulator were analyzed for their ability to distinguish between the groups. RESULTS: The simulator discriminated participants by experience level for 22 different parameters. Completion rates were lower for novices than for trainees and experts (37 % vs. 79 % and 88 % respectively, P < 0.001) and both novices and trainees took significantly longer to reach all major landmarks than the experts. Several technical aspects of competency were discriminatory; pushing with an embedded tip ( P = 0.03), correct use of the variable stiffness function ( P = 0.004), number of sigmoid N-loops ( P = 0.02); size of sigmoid N-loops ( P = 0.01), and time to remove alpha loops ( P = 0.004). Out of 10, experts rated the realism of movement at 6.4, force feedback at 6.6, looping at 6.6, and loop resolution at 6.8. CONCLUSIONS: The Olympus colonoscopy simulator has good face validity and excellent construct validity. It provides an objective assessment of colonoscopic skill on multiple measures and benchmarks have been set to allow its use as both a formative and a summative assessment tool.

A comparative study of standard vs. high definition colonoscopy for adenoma and hyperplastic polyp detection with optimized withdrawal technique.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy has a known miss rate for polyps and adenomas. High definition (HD) colonoscopes may allow detection of subtle mucosal change, potentially aiding detection of adenomas and hyperplastic polyps. AIM: To compare detection rates between HD and standard definition (SD) colonoscopy. METHODS: Prospective, cohort study with optimized withdrawal technique (withdrawal time >6 min, antispasmodic, position changes, re-examining flexures and folds). One hundred and thirty patients attending for routine colonoscopy were examined with either SD (n = 72) or HD (n = 58) colonoscopes. RESULTS: Groups were well matched. Sixty per cent of patients had at least one adenoma detected with SD vs. 71% with HD, P = 0.20, relative risk (benefit) 1.32 (95% CI 0.85-2.04). Eighty-eight adenomas (mean +/- standard deviation 1.2 +/- 1.4) were detected using SD vs. 93 (1.6 +/- 1.5) with HD, P = 0.12; however more nonflat, diminutive (<6 mm) adenomas were detected with HD, P = 0.03. Twenty-three proximal hyperplastic polyps (0.32 +/- 0.58) were detected with SD vs. 31 (0.53 +/- 0.86) with HD, P = 0.35. Overall prevalence of proximal large (>9 mm) hyperplastic polyps was 7% (0.09 +/- 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: High definition did not lead to a significant increase in adenoma or hyperplastic polyp detection, but may help where comprehensive lesion detection is paramount. High detection rates appear possible with either SD or HD, when using an optimized withdrawal technique.

Intensive training over 5 days improves colonoscopy skills long-term.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Poor standards in colonoscopy services and the introduction of a colorectal cancer screening program in the United Kingdom have highlighted the need to establish high-quality training and competency assessments in colonoscopy. The aims of this study were to evaluate the effectiveness of a 1-week hands-on colonoscopy course utilizing novel assessment tools. METHODS: Twenty-one doctors with varying colonoscopy experience who attended an accelerated colonoscopy training week (ACTW) were prospectively studied. They were trained and assessed in key aspects of colonoscopy. Knowledge was assessed with a multiple choice question (MCQ) paper. Practical hand skills were taught and evaluated using a computer simulator and live case teaching. Actual colonoscopy performance was assessed using Direct Observation of Procedural Skills scores (DOPS) and an objective tri-split video score of insertion technique. Two independent trainers taught and assessed the trainees at the start and end of the ACTW and at a median of 9 months' follow-up. RESULTS: Following training there were significant improvements in the MCQ score (P < 0.001), the simulator test case times (P = 0.02, P = 0.003), and the global DOPS score (P < or = 0.02). All improvements following the accelerated training were sustained at a median follow-up of 9 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first in the literature to describe the positive, sustained impact of an intensive hands-on colonoscopy training course. Measurements of performance in key areas of skill acquisition improved following training.

Judgement of the quality of bowel preparation at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy is associated with variability in adenoma detection rates.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Adenoma detection rates (ADRs) at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy are known to vary between endoscopists. Variability in the technique used and in the quality of bowel preparation may explain this. The aim of this study was to establish whether there is a relationship between the grading of bowel preparation and the ADR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The relationship between the ADR and assessment of bowel preparation was examined using the full United Kingdom Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial data set (n = 38 601). The consistency of the bowel preparation classification was then investigated by six experienced endoscopists (video scorers), who examined 260 flexible sigmoidoscopy cases - 20 from each of the 13 trial endoscopists. RESULTS: Overall, the ADR was significantly higher in flexible sigmoidoscopy examinations with excellent or good bowel preparation ( P = 0.02). However, endoscopists with a higher ADR coded a smaller proportion of their examinations as having excellent/good preparation ( P = 0.002). Video scorers agreed with the trial endoscopists' definition of bowel preparation in 48.9 % of the readings, but they scored the quality of preparation as poorer than the trial endoscopists in 36.4 % and 40.6 %, respectively, in the intermediate-performance group (10 % < ADR < 14 %) and lower-performance group (ADR or =14 %). There was a significant linear trend between the proportion scored as having poor bowel preparation and the ADR ( P < 0.001), varying from 2.7 % in the higher-performance ADR group to 13.4 % in the lower-performance group. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopists with a higher ADR are more likely to be critical of the quality of bowel preparation. Training in judgement processes such as non-acceptance of suboptimal bowel preparation is required in order to ensure universally high standards in screening procedures.

Development of a video assessment scoring method to determine the accuracy of endoscopist performance at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Variation in the adenoma detection rate (ADR) at flexible sigmoidoscopy screening has been shown to be due to variation in endoscopist performance. There are no objective methods for scoring an endoscopist's performance reliably, and the aim of this study was to develop a valid and reliable objective scoring method using video footage of screening flexible sigmoidoscopies. METHODS: In a series of five experiments, experienced endoscopists (the scorers) independently scored a sample (n = 43) of the 40 000 flexible sigmoidoscopy extubations recorded as part of the United Kingdom Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial (UK FSST). The scoring system, the parameters scored, and their definitions evolved over the course of the five experiments. The initial visual analogue score (range 0-100) used in the first two experiments evolved into a five-point score that ranged from 1 (E, poor) to 5 (A, excellent) in the last three experiments. The final parameters scored were: time spent viewing the mucosa, re-examination of poorly viewed areas, suctioning of fluid pools, distension of the lumen, lower rectal examination, and overall quality of the examination. The first four experiments scored one individual case per endoscopist; in experiment 5, an overall score was awarded for five cases performed by each endoscopist being assessed. RESULTS: Scoring five cases examined by an individual endoscopist using the A-E grading system was the most reliable method (interclass correlation coefficient 0.89). Cluster analysis demonstrated that the endoscopists in the high-scoring ADR group (ADR 14.7-15.9 %) could be differentiated from those in the intermediate- and low-scoring ADR groups (ADR 8.6-12.6 %). CONCLUSIONS: An objective scoring system for assessing the accuracy of performance at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy, based on video footage, is described. Endoscopists who might benefit from further training can be identified using this method.

Development and validation of a multiple-choice question paper in basic colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Factual knowledge underpins competence in all clinical skills. A multiple-choice question paper (MCQ) was designed as part of an accelerated colonoscopy training week (ACTW). In the United Kingdom, there are no validated methods of assessing core knowledge in colonoscopy. The aims of this study were to develop an MCQ paper, to demonstrate its construct validity, and to establish whether the ACTW improved core knowledge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two 30-question MCQ papers (A and B) were designed. Delegates attending the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) 2004 meeting responded either to MCQ paper A or B. Demographic data were collected on their experience in colonoscopy. Doctors attending the ACTW completed either MCQ paper A or B before the course, and the other paper after the course. RESULTS: Seventy-eight delegates at the BSG meeting completed the MCQ. There was a significant difference in the scores between those who had carried out less than 200 colonoscopies (mean 32.5 %) and those who had performed more than 200 (mean 58.4 %; P < 0.0001). Seventeen doctors attending the ACTW completed the MCQ. The mean score for papers A and B increased significantly following the course--57.2 % before the ACTW, 67 % after it ( P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: This MCQ is capable of differentiating between endoscopists with different levels of experience in colonoscopy. Doctors attending an ACTW significantly improve their knowledge in colonoscopy. A validated MCQ such as this could be used as part of the assessment process to ascertain competence in colonoscopy.