Trial Evaluating Endoscopy Competence Among Gastroenterology Trainees in the Era of the Next Accreditation System.

Competency in General Endoscopic Surgical Procedures

esophagogastroduodenoscopy

Hypothesis: ACE (The Assessment in Competency in Endoscopy Tool) tool for colonoscopy and EGD (Esophagogastroduodenoscopy) allows for reliable standardized learning curves, competency benchmarks, and creation of a centralized database that compares trainee performance amongst peers. Trainees receiving quarterly learning curves achieve competence in endoscopic procedures at a faster rate (ie less procedures) compared to trainees receiving usual feedback on endoscopic performance as established by their respective GI (gastrointestinal) fellowship program. Aims: To compare the number of procedures necessary to achieve competence in EGD and colonoscopy between trainees receiving learning curve performance feedback every three months in addition to standard feedback versus trainees receiving annual learning curve performance feedback in addition to standard feedback for these endoscopic procedures. To demonstrate the feasibility of development and adoption of a centralized database that would allow program directors and general GI trainees to generate performance reports in relation to national peers to provide real-time targeted performance feedback during training and evaluate trainee and GI fellowship program directors predictors of competence.

There has been an increasing emphasis on standardizing competency assessment and demonstrating readiness for independent practice as medical training transitions from an apprenticeship model to competency based medical education (CBME). The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) replaced their long-standing reporting system in 2014 with the Next Accreditation System (NAS). For Gastroenterology (GI) fellowship programs (GIFPs), this includes assessing and documenting competence in basic endoscopic procedures \[esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)\] in a continuous fashion. For colonoscopy, the prior minimum threshold of 140 procedures after which competence can be assessed was based on surrogates of competence such as cecal intubation rate, with limited assessment of technical and cognitive skills required to perform high-quality endoscopic examination. Recent data has demonstrated wide variability in trainee learning curves, hence emphasis needs to be shifted away from the volume of procedures performed to independent performance of well-defined metrics. Tools with comprehensive assessment of motor and cognitive abilities have been developed. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) endorsed the assessment of competence in endoscopy tool (ACE) designed to help GIFPs facilitate implementation of the NAS requirements. While the ACE tool for EGD has yet to be validated, Sedlack and colleagues recently validated the ACE tool in colonoscopy. Multicenter prospective data are needed to help guide development of CBME that define learning curves in colonoscopy and EGD and generate a centralized database which will allow programs to provide individualized feedback and follow trainee performance longitudinally throughout training.