Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool: development of a procedure-specific assessment tool for colonoscopy

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Catharine M. Walsh ; MD ; MEd ; FRCPC¹ ; ⁸ ; ¹⁰ ; ; Simon C. Ling ; MB ; ChB ; MRCP (UK)¹ ; ⁸ ; Nitin Khanna ; MD ; FRCPC² ; Mary Anne Cooper ; MD ; MSc ; MEd ; FRCPC³ ; ⁹ ; Samir C. Grover ; MD ; MEd ; FRCPC⁴ ; ⁹ ; Gary May ; MD ; FRCPC ; FASGE⁴ ; ⁹ ; Thomas D. Walters ; MD ; MBBChir ; MRCP¹ ; ⁸ ; Linda Rabeneck ; MD ; MPH ; FRCPC⁵ ; ⁹ ; Richard Reznick ; MD ; MEd ; FRCSC ; FACS⁶ ; Heather Carnahan ; PhD⁷ ; ¹⁰
• 关键词：GiECAT ; Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool
• 刊名：Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
• 出版年：May, 2014
• 年：2014
• 卷：79
• 期：5
• 页码：798-807.e5
• 全文大小：669 K

文摘

| Figures/TablesFigures/Tables | ReferencesReferences

Background

Ensuring competence remains a seminal objective of endoscopy training programs, professional organizations, and accreditation bodies; however, no widely accepted measure of endoscopic competence currently exists.

Objective

By using Delphi methodology, we aimed to develop and establish the content validity of the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool for colonoscopy.

Design

An international panel of endoscopy experts rated potential checklist and global rating items for their importance as indicators of the competence of trainees learning to perform colonoscopy. After each round, responses were analyzed and sent back to the experts for further ratings until consensus was reached.

Main Outcome Measurements

Consensus was defined a priori as聽鈮?0% of experts, in a given round, scoring聽鈮? of 5 on all remaining items.

Results

Fifty-five experts agreed to be part of the Delphi panel: 43 gastroenterologists, 10 surgeons, and 2 endoscopy managers. Seventy-three checklist and 34 global rating items were generated through a systematic literature review and survey of committee members. An additional 2 checklist and 4 global rating items were added by Delphi panelists. Five rounds of surveys were completed before consensus was achieved, with response rates ranging from 67% to 100%. Seven global ratings and 19 checklist items reached consensus as good indicators of the competence of clinicians performing colonoscopy.

Limitations

Further validation required.

Conclusion

Delphi methodology allowed for the rigorous development and content validation of a new measure of endoscopic competence, reflective of practice across institutions. Although further evaluation is required, it is a promising step toward the objective assessment of competency for use in colonoscopy training, practice, and research.