Virtual reality simulation training in endoscopy: a Cochrane review and meta-analysis

Rishad Khan; Joanne Plahouras; Bradley C. Johnston; Michael A. Scaffidi; Samir C. Grover; Catharine M. Walsh

doi:10.1055/a-0894-4400

Endoscopy, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Endoscopy 2019; 51(07): 653-664
DOI: 10.1055/a-0894-4400

Original article

Virtual reality simulation training in endoscopy: a Cochrane review and meta-analysis

Rishad Khan

¹Department of Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada

,

Joanne Plahouras

²University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

,

Bradley C. Johnston

³Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada

,

Michael A. Scaffidi

⁴Division of Gastroenterology, St. Michael’s Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

⁵Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

,

Samir C. Grover

⁴Division of Gastroenterology, St. Michael’s Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

⁵Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

,

Catharine M. Walsh

⁶Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition and the Research and Learning Institutes, Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

⁷Department of Paediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

⁸The Wilson Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

› Institutsangaben

Abstract

Background Endoscopy programs are increasingly integrating simulation training. We conducted a systematic review to determine whether virtual reality (VR) simulation training can supplement and/or replace conventional patient-based endoscopy training for health professional trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience.

Methods We searched medical, educational, and computer literature databases in July 2017 for trials that compared VR simulation training with no training, conventional training, another form of simulation training, or an alternative method of VR training. We screened, abstracted data, and performed quantitative analysis and quality assessment through Cochrane methodology.

Results We included 18 trials with 3817 endoscopic procedures. VR training provided no advantage over no training or conventional training based on the primary outcome of composite score of competency. VR training was advantageous over no training based on independent procedure completion (relative risk [RR] = 1.62, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.15 – 2.26, moderate-quality evidence), overall rating of performance (mean difference [MD] 0.45, 95 %CI 0.15 – 0.75, very low-quality evidence), and mucosal visualization (MD 0.60, 95 %CI 0.20 – 1.00, very low-quality evidence). Compared with conventional training, VR training resulted in fewer independent procedure completions (RR = 0.45, 95 %CI 0.27 – 0.74, low-quality evidence). We found no differences between VR training and no training or conventional training for other outcomes. Based on qualitative analysis, we found no significant differences between VR training and other forms of simulation training. VR curricula based in educational theory provided benefit with respect to composite score of competency, compared with unstructured curricula.

Conclusions VR simulation training is advantageous over no training and can supplement conventional endoscopy training. There is insufficient evidence that simulation training provides benefit over conventional training.

Volltext

Referenzen

References
1 Faigel DO, Baron TH, Lewis B. et al. Ensuring Competence in Endoscopy. 2005 Available from: http://s3.gi.org/physicians/EnsuringCompetence.pdf Accessed: 3 April 2019
2 Dunkin BJ. Flexible endoscopy simulators. Semin Laparosc Surg 2003; 10: 29-35
3 Kneebone R, ApSimon D. Surgical skills training: simulation and multimedia combined. Med Educ 2001; 35: 909-915
4 Krummel TM. Surgical simulation and virtual reality: The coming revolution. Ann Surg 1998; 228: 635-637
5 Sturm L, Windsor J, Cregan P. et al. Surgical simulation for training: Skills transfer to the operating room. ASERNIP-S Report No. 61. 2007 Available from: www.surgeons.org/media/300327/%0DSurgicalsimulation systematicreview.pdf Accessed: 3 April 2019
6 Poulose B, Vassiliou M, Dunkin B. et al. Fundamentals of endoscopic surgery cognitive examination: development and validity evidence. Surg Endosc 2014; 28: 631-638
7 Walsh CM. In-training gastrointestinal endoscopy competency assessment tools: Types of tools, validation and impact. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2016; 30: 357-374
8 Piromchai P, Avery A, Laopaiboon M. et al. Virtual reality training for improving the skills needed for performing surgery of the ear, nose or throat. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 9: CD010198
9 Dawe SR, Windsor J, Broeders JJL. et al. A systematic review of surgical skills transfer after simulation-based training: laparoscopic cholecystectomy and endoscopy. Ann Surg 2014; 259: 236-248
10 Zendejas B, Brydges R, Hamstra SJ. et al. State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surg 2013; 257: 586-593
11 Zendejas B, Brydges R, Wang A. et al. Patient outcomes in simulation-based medical education: A systematic review. J Gen Intern Med 2013; 28: 1078-1089
12 Walsh CM. In-training gastrointestinal endoscopy competency assessment tools: Types of tools, validation and impact. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2016; 30: 357-374
13 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. ACGME Program Requirements for Graduate Medical Education in Gastroenterology (Internal Medicine). 2017 Available from: Accessed: 3 April 2019 https://www.acgme.org/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/144_gastroenterology_2017-07-01.pdf?ver=2017-04-27-145620-577
14 McCashland T, Brand R, Lyden E. et al. The time and financial impact of training fellows in endoscopy. CORI Research Project. Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 3129-3132
15 Ekkelenkamp VE, Koch AD, Man RAD. et al. Training and competence assessment in GI endoscopy: A systematic review. Gut 2016; 65: 607-615
16 Qiao W, Bai Y, Lv R. et al. The effect of virtual endoscopy simulator training on novices: A systematic review. PLoS One 2014; 9: 1-9
17 Singh S, Sedlack RE, Cook DA. Effects of simulation-based training in gastrointestinal endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 12: 1611-1623
18 Ende A, Zopf Y, Konturek P. et al. Strategies for training in diagnostic upper endoscopy: A prospective, randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 254-260
19 Gomez PP, Willis RE, van Sickle K. Evaluation of two flexible colonoscopy simulators and transfer of skills into clinical practice. J Surg Educ 2015; 72: 220-227
20 Grover SC, Garg A, Scaffidi MA. et al. Impact of a simulation training curriculum on technical and nontechnical skills in colonoscopy: a randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 1072-1079
21 Grover SC, Scaffidi MA, Khan R. et al. Progressive learning in endoscopy simulation training improves clinical performance: a blinded randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 881-889
22 McIntosh KS, Gregor JC, Khanna NV. Computer-based virtual reality colonoscopy simulation improves patient-based colonoscopy performance. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 28: 203-206
23 Higgins JP, Lasserson T, Chandler J. et al. Standards for the planning, conduct and reporting of updates of Cochrane intervention reviews. In: Higgins JPT, Lasserson T, Chandler J. et al. Methodological expectations of Cochrane intervention reviews. London: Cochrane; 2016: 59-65
24 Khan R, Plahouras J, Johnston B. et al. Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 8: CD008237
25 Walsh CM, Sherlock M, Ling S. et al. Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy (Protocol). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; 1: CD008237
26 Miller GE. The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Acad Med 1990; 65: S63-S67
27 Higgins J, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. 2011 Available from: http://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/ Accessed: 5 April 2019
28 Schunemann H, Brozek J, Guyatt G. et al. eds. Handbook for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations using the GRADE approach. 2013 Available from: gdt.guidelinedevelopment.org/app/handbook/handbook.html Accessed: 3 April 2019
29 The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer program]. Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre; 2014
30 Park J, MacRae H, Musselman LJ. et al. Randomized controlled trial of virtual reality simulator training: transfer to live patients. Am J Surg 2007; 194: 205-211
31 Ahlberg G, Hultcrantz R, Jaramillo E. et al. Virtual reality colonoscopy simulation: a compulsory practice for the future colonoscopist?. Endoscopy 2005; 37: 1198-1204
32 Cohen J, Cohen SA, Vora KC. et al. Multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of virtual-reality simulator training in acquisition of competency in colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 64: 361-368
33 Di Giulio E, Fregonese D, Casetti T. et al. Training with a computer-based simulator achieves basic manual skills required for upper endoscopy: A randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60: 196-200
34 Ferlitsch A, Schoefl R, Puespoek A. et al. Effect of virtual endoscopy simulator training on performance of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients: A randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2010; 42: 1049-1056
35 Sedlack R, Kolars J. Computer simulator training enhances the competency of gastroenterology fellows at colonoscopy: results of a pilot study. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99: 33-37
36 Sedlack RE. Validation of computer simulation training for esophagogastroduodenoscopy: Pilot study. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 22: 1214-1219
37 Tuggy M. Virtual Reality Flexible sigmoidoscopy simulator training: impact on resident performance. J Am Board Fam Pract 1998; 11: 1-11
38 Yi S, Ryu K, Na Y. et al. Improvement of colonoscopy skills through simulation-based training. Stud Heal Technol Inf 2008; 132: 565-567
39 Gerson L, van Dam J. A prospective randomized trial comparing a virtual reality simulator to bedside teaching for training in sigmoidoscopy. Endoscopy 2003; 35: 569-575
40 Haycock A, Koch AD, Familiari P. et al. Training and transfer of colonoscopy skills: a multinational, randomized, blinded, controlled trial of simulator versus bedside training. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 298-307
41 Sedlack RE, Kolars JC, Alexander JA. Computer simulation training enhances patient comfort during endoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004; 2: 348-352
42 Shirai Y, Yoshida T, Shiraishi R. et al. Prospective randomized study on the use of a computer-based endoscopic simulator for training in esophagogastroduodenoscopy. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 23: 1046-1050
43 Brydges R, Carnahan H, Rose D. et al. Coordinating progressive levels of simulation fidelity to maximize educational benefit. Acad Med 2010; 85: 806-812
44 Guadagnoli MA, Lee TD. Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. J Mot Behav 2004; 36: 212-224
45 Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER. et al. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach 2005; 27: 10-28
46 Walsh CM, Ling SC, Wang CS. et al. Concurrent versus terminal feedback: it may be better to wait. Acad Med 2009; 84: S54-S57
47 Cook DA, Brydges R, Zendejas B. et al. Technology-enhanced simulation to assess health professionals: a systematic review of validity evidence, research methods, and reporting quality. Acad Med 2013; 88: 872-883
48 Hatala R, Cook DA, Zendejas B. et al. Feedback for simulation-based procedural skills training: a meta-analysis and critical narrative synthesis. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2014; 19: 251-272
49 Cohen J, Bosworth BP, Chak A. et al. Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations (PIVI) on the use of endoscopy simulators for training and assessing skill. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 471-475

Zusatzmaterial

Zusatzmaterial