Skip to content

Feedback Given by an Automatic and Objective System in Simulated Colonoscopy Increase Learning and Time Spent Practicing

Do Feedback Given by an Automatic and Objective System in Simulated Colonoscopy Increase Learning and Time Spent Practicing? A Randomized Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03248453
Enrollment
44
Registered
2017-08-14
Start date
2016-12-31
Completion date
2017-02-28
Last updated
2017-08-14

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Education, Medical, Simulation Training

Keywords

Simulated colonoscopy, Self-regulated learning

Brief summary

The aim is to investigate if feedback given by an automatic and objective system in simulated colonoscopy (the investigation of the large intestine) increase learning and time spent practicing.

Detailed description

A standardized Kagaku Colonoscopy Training Model (Kyoto Kagaku Co Ltd, Kyoto, Japan) in combination with an Olympus colonoscope, a monitor and a Magnetic Endoscope Imaging (MEI) Scope Guide (Olympus Medical systems Corp) is used. The Kyoto Kagaku Colonoscope Training Model is a phantom model in full-size of the human colon. The model consists of an abdomen model, a soft and flexible rubber colon, anal sphincter opening and an abdomen skin cover. The rubber colon provides a realistic life-like response, which makes the participants able to feel when the colonoscope stretch and bent the rubber colon. To reduce friction between the rubber colon and the colonoscope a lubricant gels is applied inside the rubber colon. By hand pump the anal sphincter is manipulated, allowing insufflation and suction. Six different cases with different level of difficulty are possible. We chose case 2 (simple layout, but a long sigmoid colon) and case 4 (a challenging layout, with a difficult-to-shorten sigmoid colon and a drooping transverse colon) for training cases. Case 3 (simple layout, but with a naturally formed Alpha loop in the sigmoid colon) is chosen for the final test. Experts - 10 experts, defined by the number of colonoscopies in total (\> 1000), colonoscopies done within the last year (\> 150) and locally considered among the best, will be recruited voluntarily. The experts are introduced to the Colonoscopy Training Model and allowed 15 minutes of practices before tests is recorded. With the exception of the first expert who is given the best Colonoscopy Progression Score (CoPS) executed by an instructor, the experts are shown the other experts top scores for each case as a motivation. Each expert carries out three different cases: Case 2, 3 and 4. Time for each case are 15 minutes. Novices - 44 novices (interns and junior residents) with no experience in colonoscopy will be enrolled through a volunteer application form in the study. All novices will be handed written information about colonoscopy in general and basics. Novices will be introduced to the technical characteristics of the colonoscope by an instructor and allowed training for 15 minutes before the data collection is started. No feedback (from instructors) will be given during the training. Instructors will start data collection with introduction of the colonoscope into the anus and the data collection is stopped when the cecum is reached. For training the novices will have a free choice between case 2 and 4. Each novice is given the opportunity to redo the training for as long as they like before they believe to be ready for the final case. Case 3 will be used for the final test and all participants are to complete the case tree times. Novices will be randomized into two groups: 1. The intervention group is given feedback; presented with the CoPS after each time they reach cecum. A leaderboard, presenting all the experts CoPS, for comparison and motivation will be present next to the phantom model. 2. Control group is not given any CoPS.

Interventions

OTHERCoPS

The COPS is an automated and objective computer-based program which generate a score/number after the colonoscope has reached the cecum. The participants are able to compare the score with experts.

Sponsors

Technical University of Denmark
CollaboratorOTHER
Rigshospitalet, Denmark
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Physicians * No endoscopic experience

Exclusion criteria

* Non-physicians * Previous experience with endoscopy

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Final CoPSThere is only one time point (baseline = after the final cases)The final CoPS is a mean-score of the CoPS´ in the final cases. Primary outcome is the difference between the interventiongroup and the control group.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Total time spent practicingup to 120 minutesDifference in total time spent practicing between groups
Amount of time spend on each caseup to 720 secondsTime spent practicing on case 2 versus time spent practicing on case 4

Countries

Denmark

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 6, 2026