Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2018 Aug 17;8(8):CD008237.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008237.pub3.

Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Rishad Khan  1 , Joanne Plahouras, Bradley C Johnston, Michael A Scaffidi, Samir C Grover, Catharine M Walsh
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Rishad Khan et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Endoscopy has traditionally been taught with novices practicing on real patients under the supervision of experienced endoscopists. Recently, the growing awareness of the need for patient safety has brought simulation training to the forefront. Simulation training can provide trainees with the chance to practice their skills in a learner-centred, risk-free environment. It is important to ensure that skills gained through simulation positively transfer to the clinical environment. This updated review was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) simulation training in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Objectives: To determine whether virtual reality simulation training can supplement and/or replace early conventional endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) in diagnostic oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy, and/or sigmoidoscopy for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience.

Search methods: We searched the following health professions, educational, and computer databases until 12 July 2017: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL, AMED, ERIC, Education Full Text, CBCA Education, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Abstracts in New Technology and Engineering, Computer and Information Systems Abstracts, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. We also searched the grey literature until November 2017.

Selection criteria: We included randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials comparing VR endoscopy simulation training versus any other method of endoscopy training with outcomes measured on humans in the clinical setting, including conventional patient-based training, training using another form of endoscopy simulation, or no training. We also included trials comparing two different methods of VR training.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of trials, and extracted data on the trial characteristics and outcomes. We pooled data for meta-analysis where participant groups were similar, studies assessed the same intervention and comparator, and had similar definitions of outcome measures. We calculated risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We calculated mean difference (MD) and standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes when studies reported the same or different outcome measures, respectively. We used GRADE to rate the quality of the evidence.

Main results: We included 18 trials (421 participants; 3817 endoscopic procedures). We judged three trials as at low risk of bias. Ten trials compared VR training with no training, five trials with conventional endoscopy training, one trial with another form of endoscopy simulation training, and two trials compared two different methods of VR training. Due to substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity across our four comparisons, we did not perform a meta-analysis for several outcomes. We rated the quality of evidence as moderate, low, or very low due to risk of bias, imprecision, and heterogeneity.Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training: There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect on composite score of competency (MD 3.10, 95% CI -0.16 to 6.36; 1 trial, 24 procedures; low-quality evidence). Composite score of competency was based on 5-point Likert scales assessing seven domains: atraumatic technique, colonoscope advancement, use of instrument controls, flow of procedure, use of assistants, knowledge of specific procedure, and overall performance. Scoring range was from 7 to 35, a higher score representing a higher level of competence. Virtual reality training compared to no training likely provides participants with some benefit, as measured by independent procedure completion (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.26; 6 trials, 815 procedures; moderate-quality evidence). We evaluated overall rating of performance (MD 0.45, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.75; 1 trial, 18 procedures), visualisation of mucosa (MD 0.60, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.00; 1 trial, 55 procedures), performance time (MD -0.20 minutes, 95% CI -0.71 to 0.30; 2 trials, 29 procedures), and patient discomfort (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.68 to 0.35; 2 trials, 145 procedures), all with very low-quality evidence. No trials reported procedure-related complications or critical flaws (e.g. bleeding, luminal perforation) (3 trials, 550 procedures; moderate-quality evidence).Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient-based training: One trial reported composite score of competency but did not provide sufficient data for quantitative analysis. Virtual reality training compared to conventional patient-based training resulted in fewer independent procedure completions (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74; 2 trials, 174 procedures; low-quality evidence). We evaluated performance time (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.55 to 0.80; 2 trials, 34 procedures), overall rating of performance (MD -0.90, 95% CI -4.40 to 2.60; 1 trial, 16 procedures), and visualisation of mucosa (MD 0.0, 95% CI -6.02 to 6.02; 1 trial, 18 procedures), all with very low-quality evidence. Virtual reality training in combination with conventional training appears to be advantageous over VR training alone. No trials reported any procedure-related complications or critical flaws (3 trials, 72 procedures; very low-quality evidence).Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus another form of endoscopy simulation: Based on one study, there were no differences between groups with respect to composite score of competency, performance time, and visualisation of mucosa. Virtual reality training in combination with another form of endoscopy simulation training did not appear to confer any benefit compared to VR training alone.Two methods of virtual reality training: Based on one study, a structured VR simulation-based training curriculum compared to self regulated learning on a VR simulator appears to provide benefit with respect to a composite score evaluating competency. Based on another study, a progressive-learning curriculum that sequentially increases task difficulty provides benefit with respect to a composite score of competency over the structured VR training curriculum.

Authors' conclusions: VR simulation-based training can be used to supplement early conventional endoscopy training for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience. However, we found insufficient evidence to advise for or against the use of VR simulation-based training as a replacement for early conventional endoscopy training. The quality of the current evidence was low due to inadequate randomisation, allocation concealment, and/or blinding of outcome assessment in several trials. Further trials are needed that are at low risk of bias, utilise outcome measures with strong evidence of validity and reliability, and examine the optimal nature and duration of training.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Rishad Khan was an author on a study included in this review (Grover 2017). He has received research funding from AbbVie and Ferring Pharmaceuticals outside the submitted work.

Joanne Plahouras has no conflicts of interest to declare.

Bradley C Johnston has no conflicts of interest to declare.

Michael A Scaffidi was an author on two studies included in this review (Grover 2015; Grover 2017).

Samir C Grover was the first author on two studies included in this review (Grover 2015; Grover 2017). He has received research funding from AbbVie and Ferring Pharmaceuticals, payments for consulting and speaking from AbbVie and Takeda, and has stock in Volo Healthcare outside the submitted work.

Catharine M Walsh was the senior author on two studies included in this review (Grover 2015; Grover 2017).

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram.
2
2
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
3
3
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgments about each risk of bias item for each included study.
4
4
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 1.1 Composite score of competency.
5
5
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 1.2 Independent procedure completion: type of endoscopic procedure under study.
6
6
Analysis 1.3. Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 1.3 Independent procedure completion: level of participant endoscopy experience.
7
7
Analysis 1.4. Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 1.4 Performance time.
8
8
Analysis 1.5. Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 1.5 Patient discomfort.
9
9
Analysis 1.6. Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 1.6 Overall global rating of performance or competency.
10
10
Analysis 1.7. Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 1.7 Visualisation of mucosa.
11
11
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient‐based training, Outcome 2.1 Independent procedure completion.
12
12
Analysis 2.2 Comparison 2 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient‐based training, Outcome 2.2 Performance time.
13
13
Analysis 2.3 Comparison 2 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient‐based training, Outcome 2.3 Overall global rating of performance or competency.
14
14
Analysis 2.4 Comparison 2 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient‐based training, Outcome 2.4 Visualisation of mucosa.
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 1 Composite score of competency.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 2 Independent procedure completion: type of endoscopic procedure under study.
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 3 Independent procedure completion: level of participant endoscopy experience.
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 4 Performance time.
1.5
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 5 Patient discomfort: level of participant endoscopy experience.
1.6
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 6 Overall global rating of performance or competency.
1.7
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training, Outcome 7 Visualisation of mucosa.
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient‐based training, Outcome 1 Independent procedure completion.
2.2
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient‐based training, Outcome 2 Performance time.
2.3
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient‐based training, Outcome 3 Overall global rating of performance or competency.
2.4
2.4. Analysis
Comparison 2 Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient‐based training, Outcome 4 Visualisation of mucosa.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

References to studies included in this review

Ahlberg 2005 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Ahlberg G, Hultcrantz R, Jaramillo E, Lindblom A, Arvidsson D. Virtual reality colonoscopy simulation: a compulsory practice for the future colonoscopist?. Endoscopy 2005;37(12):1198‐204. [DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-921049; PUBMED: 16329017] - DOI - PubMed
Cohen 2006 {published data only}
    1. Cohen J, Cohen SA, Vora KC, Xue X, Burdick JS, Bank S, et al. Multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of virtual‐reality simulator training in acquisition of competency in colonoscopy. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2006;64(3):361‐8. [DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2005.11.062; PUBMED: 16923483] - DOI - PubMed
Di Giulio 2004 {published data only}
    1. Giulio E, Fregonese D, Casetti T, Cestari R, Chilovi F, D'Ambra G, et al. Training with a computer‐based simulator achieves basic manual skills required for upper endoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2004;60(2):196‐200. [PUBMED: 15278044] - PubMed
Ende 2012 {published data only}
    1. Ende A, Zopf Y, Konturek P, Naegel A, Hahn EG, Matthes K, et al. Strategies for training in diagnostic upper endoscopy: a prospective, randomized trial. Gastrointestestinal Endoscopy 2012;75(2):254‐60. [DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.07.063; PUBMED: 22153875] - DOI - PubMed
Ferlitsch 2010 {published data only}
    1. Ferlitsch A, Schoefl R, Puespoek A, Miehsler W, Schoeniger‐Hekele M, Hofer H, et al. Effect of virtual endoscopy simulator training on performance of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2010;42(12):1049‐56. [DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1255818; PUBMED: 20972956] - DOI - PubMed
Gerson 2003 {published data only}
    1. Gerson LB, Dam J. A prospective randomized trial comparing a virtual reality simulator to bedside teaching for training in sigmoidoscopy. Endoscopy 2003;35(7):569‐75. [DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-40243; PUBMED: 12822091] - DOI - PubMed
Gomez 2015 {published data only}
    1. Gomez PP, Willis RE, Sickle K. Evaluation of two flexible colonoscopy simulators and transfer of skills into clinical practice. Journal of Surgical Education 2015;72(2):220‐7. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2014.08.010; PUBMED: 25239553] - DOI - PubMed
Grover 2015 {published data only}
    1. Grover SC, Garg A, Scaffidi MA, Yu JJ, Plener IS, Yong E, et al. Impact of a simulation training curriculum on technical and nontechnical skills in colonoscopy: a randomized trial. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2015;82(6):1072‐9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.04.008; PUBMED: 26007221] - DOI - PubMed
Grover 2017 {published data only}
    1. Grover SC, Scaffidi MA, Khan R, Garg A, Al‐Mazroui A, Alomani T, et al. Progressive learning in endoscopy simulation training improves clinical performance: A blinded randomized trial. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2017;85(5):881‐9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.03.1529; PUBMED: 28366440] - DOI - PubMed
Haycock 2010 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Haycock A, Koch AD, Familiari P, Delft F, Dekker E, Petruzziello L, et al. Training and transfer of colonoscopy skills: a multinational, randomized, blinded, controlled trial of simulator versus bedside training. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2010;71(2):298‐307. [DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.07.017; PUBMED: 19889408] - DOI - PubMed
McIntosh 2014 {published data only}
    1. McIntosh KS, Gregor JC, Khanna NV. Computer‐based virtual reality colonoscopy simulation improves patient‐based colonoscopy performance. Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2014;28(4):203‐6. [PUBMED: 24729994] - PMC - PubMed
Park 2007 {published data only}
    1. Park J, MacRae H, Musselman LJ, Rossos P, Hamstra SJ, Wolman S, et al. Randomized controlled trial of virtual reality simulator training: transfer to live patients. American Journal of Surgery 2007;194(2):205‐11. [DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2006.11.032; PUBMED: 17618805] - DOI - PubMed
Sedlack 2004 {published data only}
    1. Sedlack RE, Kolars JC. Computer simulator training enhances the competency of gastroenterology fellows at colonoscopy: results of a pilot study. American Journal of Gastroenterology 2004;99(1):33‐7. [PUBMED: 14687137] - PubMed
Sedlack 2004a {published data only}
    1. Sedlack RE, Kolars JC, Alexander JA. Computer simulation training enhances patient comfort during endoscopy. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2004;2(4):348‐52. [PUBMED: 15067632] - PubMed
Sedlack 2007 {published data only}
    1. Sedlack RE. Validation of computer simulation training for esophagogastroduodenoscopy: pilot study. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2007;22(8):1214‐9. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2007.04841.x; PUBMED: 17559386] - DOI - PubMed
Shirai 2008 {published data only}
    1. Shirai Y, Yoshida T, Shiraishi R, Okamoto T, Nakamura H, Harada T, et al. Prospective randomized study on the use of a computer‐based endoscopic simulator for training in esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2008;23(7 Pt 1):1046‐50. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2008.05457.x; PUBMED: 18554236] - DOI - PubMed
Tuggy 1998 {published data only}
    1. Tuggy ML. Virtual reality flexible sigmoidoscopy simulator training: impact on resident performance. Journal of the American Board of Family Practice 1998;11(6):426‐33. [PUBMED: 9875997] - PubMed
Yi 2008 {published data only}
    1. Yi SY, Ryu KH, Na YJ, Woo HS, Ahn W, Kim WS, et al. Improvement of colonoscopy skills through simulation‐based training. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 2008;132:565‐7. [PUBMED: 18391369] - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Ahad 2011 {published data only}
    1. Ahad S, Advani V, Boehler ML, Schwind C, Hassan I. The impact of simulator fidelity on colonoscopic skill acquisition. A randomized trial between high and low fidelity colonoscopic simulators. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2011;1:S127‐8.
Ahad 2013 {published data only}
    1. Ahad S, Boehler M, Schwind CJ, Hassan I. The effect of model fidelity on colonoscopic skills acquisition. A randomized controlled study. Journal of Surgical Education 2013;70(4):522‐7. - PubMed
Ahn 2016 {published data only}
    1. Ahn JY, Lee JS, Lee GH, Lee JW, Na HK, Jung KW, et al. The efficacy of a newly designed, easy‐to‐manufacture training simulator for endoscopic biopsy of the stomach. Gut and Liver 2016;10(5):764‐72. - PMC - PubMed
Ansell 2013 {published data only}
    1. Ansell J, Arnaoutakis K, Goddard S, Hawkes N, Leicester R, Dolwani S, et al. The WIMAT colonoscopy suitcase model: a novel porcine polypectomy trainer. Colorectal Disease 2013;15(2):217‐23. - PubMed
Bai 2011 {published data only}
    1. Bai Y, Zhi F, Du Q, Liu S, Zhang Q, Pan D, et al. Optimization study of virtual reality simulator training methods for colonoscopy. [Chinese]. Chinese Journal of Gastroenterology 2011;16(6):345‐7.
Bai 2012 {published data only}
    1. Bai Y, Zhi FC, Liu SD, Chen CL, Pan DS, Du XF, et al. Control study on colonoscopy skills acquiring from endoscopic simulation system transferring to patients. National Medical Journal of China 2012;92(18):1285‐7. - PubMed
Carot 2015 {published data only}
    1. Carot L, Hernandez C, Balaguer F, Alvarez C, Lanas A, Cubiella J, et al. Rate of detection of serrated lesions in proximal colon by simulated sigmoidoscopy. United European Gastroenterology Journal 2015;3(5S):A626‐7 (Abstract P1648). - PMC - PubMed
Carot 2016 {published data only}
    1. Carot L, Castells A, Hernandez C, Alvarez‐Urturi C, Balaguer F, Lanas A, et al. Rate of detection of serrated lesions in proximal colon by simulated sigmoidoscopy: comparison with colonoscopy and faecal immunochemical testing in a multicentre pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. Gastroenterology 2016;1:S750‐1. - PMC - PubMed
Castells 2014 {published data only}
    1. Castells A, Quintero A, Alvarez E, Bujanda C, Cubiella L, Salas J, et al. Rate of detection of advanced neoplasms in proximal colon by simulated sigmoidoscopy vs fecal immunochemical tests. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2014; Vol. 12, issue 10:1708‐16.e4. - PubMed
Ekkelenkamp 2016 {published data only}
    1. Ekkelenkamp VE, Koch AD, Man RA, Kuipers EJ. Training and competence assessment in GI endoscopy: a systematic review. Gut 2016;65(4):607‐15. - PubMed
Elvevi 2012 {published data only}
    1. Elvevi A, Cantu P, Maconi G, Conte D, Penagini R. Evaluation of hands‐on training in colonoscopy: is a computer‐based simulator useful?. Digestive & Liver Disease 2012;44(7):580‐4. - PubMed
Grover 2016 {published data only}
    1. Grover S, Scaffidi M, Chana B, Gupta K, Zasowski M, Zarghom O, et al. A virtual reality curriculum in non‐technical skills improves performance in colonoscopy: a randomized trial. Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2016;4792898:8‐9 (Abstract A10).
Hritz 2013 {published data only}
    1. Hritz I, Dubravcsik Z, Szepes A, Szepes Z, Kruglikova I, Funch‐Jensen P, et al. Assessment of the effectiveness of ERCP mechanical simulator (EMS) exercise on trainees' ERCP performance in the initial learning period: multicenter randomized controlled trial. United European Gastroenterology Journal 2013;1(1S):A333 (Abstract P751).
Jirapinyo 2014 {published data only}
    1. Jirapinyo P, Bing V, Kumar N, Ryan MB, Aihara H, Imaeda AB, et al. A randomized trial of endoscopic simulator training in first year gastroenterology fellows. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2014;79(5S):AB218 (Abstract Su1571).
Jirapinyo 2015 {published data only}
    1. Jirapinyo P, Kumar N, Tintara S, Bing V, Aihara H, Perencevich M, et al. Endoscopic part‐task simulator training improves endoscopic performance in gastroenterology fellows. Gastroenterology 2015;148(4 Suppl 1):S‐202 (Abstract Sa1032).
Jun 2013 {published data only}
    1. Jun W. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy training with a computer‐based simulator. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2013;28(Suppl 3):725 (Abstract PR0087).
Kaltenbach 2011 {published data only}
    1. Kaltenbach T, Leung C, Wu K, Yan K, Friedland S, Soetikno R. Use of the colonoscope training model with the colonoscope 3D imaging probe improved trainee colonoscopy performance: a pilot study. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 2011;56(5):1496‐502. - PubMed
Koch 2015 {published data only}
    1. Koch AD, Ekkelenkamp VE, Haringsma J, Schoon EJ, Man RA, Kuipers EJ. Simulated colonoscopy training leads to improved performance during patient‐based assessment. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2015;81(3):630‐6. - PubMed
Li 2012 {published data only}
    1. Li Z, Xu AG, Ma QY, Li BS, Du QF, Liu SD, et al. Effect of mental imagery rehearsal on gastroscopy training with virtual reality endoscopic simulator. World Chinese Journal of Digestology 2012;20(24):2276‐80.
Liao 2013 {published data only}
    1. Liao WC, Leung JW, Wang HP, Chang WH, Chu CH, Lin JT, et al. Coached practice using ERCP mechanical simulator improves trainees' ERCP performance: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2013;45(10):799‐805. - PubMed
Lim 2011 {published data only}
    1. Lim BS, Leung JW, Lee J, Yen D, Beckett L, Tancredi D, et al. Effect of ERCP mechanical simulator (EMS) practice on trainees' ERCP performance in the early learning period: US multicenter randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Gastroenterology 2011;106(2):300‐6. - PubMed
Meng 2016 {published data only}
    1. Meng W, Leung JW, Yue P, Wang Z, Wang X, Wang H, et al. Simulation practice with ERCP mechanical simulator (EMS) improves basic skills of novice surgical trainees ‐ a progress report. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2016;31:321‐2.
NCT01405443 {unpublished data only}
    1. NCT01405443. Simulator training for gastrointestinal endoscopy [Simulator training for gastrointestinal endoscopy ‐ how much simulator training is required to acquire proficiency in gastrointestinal endoscopy]. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01405443 (first received 29 July 2011).
Nehme 2013 {published data only}
    1. Nehme J, Sodergren MH, Sugden C, Aggarwal R, Gillen S, Feussner H, et al. A randomized controlled trial evaluating endoscopic and laparoscopic training in skills transfer for novices performing a simulated NOTES task. Surgical Innovation 2013;20(6):631‐8. - PubMed
Plooy 2016 {published data only}
    1. Plooy AM, Hill A, Horswill MS, Cresp ASG, Karamatic R, Riek S, et al. The efficacy of training insertion skill on a physical model colonoscopy simulator. Endoscopy International Open 2016;4(12):E1252‐60. - PMC - PubMed
Qiao 2014 {published data only}
    1. Qiao W, Bai Y, Lv R, Zhang W, Chen Y, Lei S, et al. The effect of virtual endoscopy simulator training on novices: a systematic review. PLoS ONE 2014;9(2):e89224. - PMC - PubMed
Santos 2017 {published data only}
    1. Santos N, Carter J, He F, Linsk A, Lungarini A, Nemani A, et al. A learning curve study using the Virtual Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery Trainer (VTEST). Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques 2017;31(1S):S217 (Abstract P306).
Scaffidi 2018 {published data only}
    1. Scaffidi MA, Al Mazroui A, Lin P, Kalaichandran R, Lyn R, Walsh CM, et al. A45 Impact of an ergonomic intervention on simulated colonoscopy performance. Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2018;1(Suppl 1):78.
Seshadri 2014 {published data only}
    1. Seshadri D, Barkel D, Riggs T, Wasvary H. Endoscopic simulation training for colonoscopy. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum 2014;57(5):e340 (Abstract P369). - PubMed
Singh 2014 {published data only}
    1. Singh S, Sedlack RE, Cook DA. Effects of simulation‐based training in gastrointestinal endoscopy: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2014;12(10):1611‐23.e4. - PubMed
Snyder 2011 {published data only}
    1. Snyder CW, Vandromme MJ, Tyra SL, Porterfield JR, Clements RH, Hawn MT. Effects of virtual reality simulator training method and observational learning on surgical performance. World Journal of Surgery 2011;35(2):245‐52. - PubMed
Strosberg 2017 {published data only}
    1. Strosberg DS, Osayi SN, Drosdeck J, Dettorre R, Suzo A, Hazey J. Virtual reality simulation in flexible endoscopy: implications for resident training. Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques 2017;31(S1):S207 (Abstract P273).
Van Sickle 2011 {published data only}
    1. Sickle KR, Buck L, Willis R, Mangram A, Truitt MS, Shabahang M, et al. A multicenter, simulation‐based skills training collaborative using shared GI Mentor II systems: results from the Texas Association of Surgical Skills Laboratories (TASSL) flexible endoscopy curriculum. Surgical Endoscopy 2011;25(9):2980‐6. - PubMed
Williams 2015 {published data only}
    1. Williams MR, Crossett JR, Cleveland EM, Smoot CP, Aluka KJ, Coviello LC, et al. Equivalence in colonoscopy results between gastroenterologists and general surgery residents following an endoscopy simulation curriculum. Journal of Surgical Education 2015;72(4):654‐7. - PubMed

References to ongoing studies

Grover 2017a {published data only}
    1. Grover SC, Scaffidi MA, Khan R, Chana B, Iqbal S, Lin PC, et al. A virtual reality curriculum in non‐technical skills improves colonoscopic performance: a randomized trial. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2017;85(5S):AB181.

Additional references

ASGE 2011
    1. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee. Complications of colonoscopy. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2011;74(4):745‐52. - PubMed
Bar‐Meir 2000
    1. Bar‐Meir S. A new endoscopic simulator. Endoscopy 2000;32(11):898‐900. - PubMed
Barton 2008
    1. Barton R. Validity and reliability of an accreditation assessment for colonoscopy [abstract]. Gut 2008;57(Suppl 1):A2.
Barton 2012
    1. Barton JR, Corbett S, Vleuten CP, for the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme and UK Joint Advisory Group for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. The validity and reliability of a direct observation of procedural skills assessment tool: assessing colonoscopic skills of senior endoscopists. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2012;75:591‐7. - PubMed
Blumenthal 1994
    1. Blumenthal D. Making medical errors into "medical treasures''. JAMA 1994;272(23):1867‐8. - PubMed
Brydges 2010
    1. Brydges R, Carnahan H, Rose D, Rose L, Dubrowski A. Coordinating progressive levels of simulation fidelity to maximize educational benefit. Academic Medicine 2010;85:806‐12. - PubMed
Brydges 2014
    1. Brydges R, Hatala R, Zendejas B, Erwin PJ, Cook DA. Linking simulation‐based educational assessments and patient‐related outcomes: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Academic Medicine 2015;90(2):246‐56. - PubMed
Brydges 2015
    1. Brydges R, Manzone J, Shanks D, Hatala R, Hamstra SJ, Zendejas B, et al. Self‐regulated learning in simulation‐based training: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Medical Education 2015;49(4):368‐78. - PubMed
Cass 1996
    1. Cass OW, Freeman ML, Cohen J, Zuckerman G, Watkins J, Nord J, et al. Acquisition of competency in endoscopic skills (ACES) during training: a multicentre study [abstract]. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 1996;43:308.
Chen 2001
    1. Chen G, Gully SM, Eden D. Validation of a new general self‐efficacy scale. Organizational Research Methods 2001;4(1):62‐83.
Classen 1974
    1. Classen M, Rupin H. Practical endoscopy training using a new gastrointestinal phantom. Endoscopy 1974;6(2):127‐31.
Cook 2013
    1. Cook DA, Brydges R, Zendejas B, Hamstra SJ, Hatala R. Technology‐enhanced simulation to assess health professionals: a systematic review of validity evidence, research methods, and reporting quality. Academic Medicine 2013;88(6):872‐83. - PubMed
Dawe 2014
    1. Dawe SR, Windsor JA, Broeders JA, Cregan PC, Hewett PJ, Maddern GJ. A systematic review of surgical skills transfer after simulation‐based training: laparoscopic cholecystectomy and endoscopy. Annals of Surgery 2014;259(2):236‐48. - PubMed
Dedy 2015
    1. Dedy NJ, Szasz P, Louridas M, Bonrath EM, Husslein H, Grantcharov TP. Objective structured assessment of nontechnical skills: reliability of a global rating scale for the in‐training assessment in the operating room. Surgery 2015;157(6):1002‐13. - PubMed
Dunkin 2003
    1. Dunkin BJ. Flexible endoscopy simulators. Seminars in Laparoscopic Surgery 2003;10(1):29‐35. - PubMed
Dunkin 2007
    1. Dunkin B, Adrales GL, Apelgren K, Mellinger JD. Surgical simulation: a current review. Surgical Endoscopy 2007;21(3):357‐66. - PubMed
Egger 1997
    1. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta‐analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315(7109):629‐34. - PMC - PubMed
Ellaway 2006
    1. Ellaway R, Candler C, Greene P, Smothers V. An architectural model for MedBiquitous Virtual Patients: MedBiquitous white paper. 2016. groups.medbiq.org/medbiq/display/VPWG/MedBiquitous+Virtual+Patient+Archi... (accessed 10 March 2018).
Endnote 2016 [Computer program]
    1. Clarivate Analytics. Endnote X8. Version 8.1. Philadelphia: Clarivate Analytics, 2016.
Faigel 2005
    1. Faigel DO, Baron TH, Lewis B, Petersen B, Petrini J, Popp JW, et al. for the ASGE Taskforce on Ensuring Competence in Endoscopy and the American College of Gastroenterology Executive and Practice Management Committees. Ensuring competence in endoscopy. 2005. s3.gi.org/physicians/EnsuringCompetence.pdf (accessed 10 December 2017).
Frank 2015
    1. Frank JR, Snell L, Sherbino J, editors. The CanMEDS 2015 Physician Competency Framework. Ottawa: The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, 2015.
GRADEpro 2017 [Computer program]
    1. McMaster University (developed by Evidence Prime). GRADEpro GDT. Version accessed 2 December 2017. Hamilton (ON): McMaster University (developed by Evidence Prime), 2015.
Grantcharov 2003
    1. Grantcharov TP, Bardram L, Funch‐Jensen P, Rosenberg J. Learning curves and impact of previous operative experience on performance on a virtual reality simulator to test laparoscopic surgical skills. American Journal of Surgery 2003;185(2):146‐9. - PubMed
Guadagnoli 2012
    1. Guadagnoli M, Morin MP, Dubrowski A. The application of the challenge point framework in medical education. Medical Education 2012;46(5):447‐53. - PubMed
Hatala 2005
    1. Hatala R, Kassen BO, Nishikawa J, Cole G, Issenberg SB. Incorporating simulation technology in a Canadian internal medicine specialty examination: a descriptive report. Academic Medicine 2005;80(6):554‐6. - PubMed
Hatala 2014
    1. Hatala R, Cook DA, Zendejas B, Hamstra SJ, Brydges R. Feedback for simulation‐based procedural skills training: a meta‐analysis and critical narrative synthesis. Advances in Health Sciences Education 2014;19(2):251‐72. - PubMed
Higgins 2011
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
Higgins 2016
    1. Higgins JPT, Lasserson T, Chandler J, Tovey D, Churchill R. Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews.. Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews. Cochrane: London, 2016.
Hochberger 2004
    1. Hochberger J, Euler K, Naegel A, Hahn E G, Maiss J. The compact Erlangen Active Simulator for interventional endoscopy: a prospective comparison in structured team‐training courses on "endoscopic hemostasis" for doctors and nurses to the "Endo‐Trainer" model. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 2004;39(9):895‐902. - PubMed
Hodges 2003
    1. Hodges B, McIlroy JH. Analytic global OSCE ratings are sensitive to level of training. Medical Education 2003;37(11):1012‐6. - PubMed
Holmboe 2010
    1. Holmboe ES, Sherbino J, Long DM, Swing SR, Frank JR. The role of assessment in competency‐based medical education. Medical Teacher 2010;32(8):676‐82. - PubMed
Issenberg 1999
    1. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Hart IR, Mayer JW, Felner JM, Petrusa ER, et al. Simulation technology for health care professional skills training and assessment. JAMA 1999;282(9):861‐6. - PubMed
Issenberg 2005
    1. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee Gordon D, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high‐fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Medical Teacher 2005;27(1):10‐28. - PubMed
JAG Central Office 2010
    1. Joint Advisory Group Central Office. Summative DOPS assessment form – colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy. www.thejag.org.uk/Downloads/DOPS%20Forms%20For%20International%20and%20r... (accessed 10 December 2017).
Kim 2001
    1. Kim JH, Park S, Lee H, Yuk KC, Lee H. Virtual reality simulations in physics education. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer‐Enhanced Learning 2001; Vol. 3, issue 2.
Kneebone 2001
    1. Kneebone R, ApSimon D. Surgical skills training: simulation and multimedia combined. Medical Education 2001;35(9):909‐15. - PubMed
Kononowicz 2016
    1. Kononowicz AA, Woodham L, Georg C, Edelbring S, Stathakarou N, Davies D, et al. Virtual patient simulations for health professional education. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016, Issue 5. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012194] - DOI
Krummel 1998
    1. Krummel TM. Surgical simulation and virtual reality: the coming revolution. Annals of Surgery 1998;228(5):635‐7. - PMC - PubMed
Langsley 1991
    1. Langsley DG. Medical competence and performance assessment. A new era. JAMA 1991;266(7):977‐80. - PubMed
LeBlanc 2009
    1. LeBlanc VR, Tabak D, Kneebone R, Nestel D, MacRae H, Moulton CA. Psychometric properties of an integrated assessment of technical and communication skills. American Journal of Surgery 2009;197(1):96‐101. - PubMed
Macaskill 2001
    1. Macaskill P, Walter SD, Irwig L. A comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta‐analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2001;20(4):641‐54. - PubMed
Mahmood 2004
    1. Mahmood T, Darzi A. The learning curve for a colonoscopy simulator in the absence of any feedback: no feedback, no learning. Surgical Endoscopy 2004;18(8):1224‐30. - PubMed
Matharoo 2017
    1. Matharoo M, Haycock A, Sevdalis N, Thomas‐Gibson S. A prospective study of patient safety incidents in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Endoscopy International Open 2017;5(1):E83‐9. - PMC - PubMed
McCashland 2000
    1. McCashland T, Brand R, Lyden E, Garmo P. The time and financial impact of training fellows in endoscopy. CORI Research Project. Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative. American Journal of Gastroenterology 2000;95(11):3129‐32. - PubMed
Miller 1990
    1. Miller GE. The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Academic Medicine 1990;65(9 Suppl):S63‐7. - PubMed
Murad 2010
    1. Murad MH, Coto‐Yglesias F, Varkey P, Prokop LJ, Murad AL. The effectiveness of self‐directed learning in health professions education: a systematic review. Medical Education 2010;44:1057‐68. - PubMed
Palter 2013
    1. Palter VN, Orzech N, Reznick RK, Grantcharov TP. Validation of a structured training and assessment curriculum for technical skill acquisition in minimally invasive surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Annals of Surgery 201;257:224‐30. - PubMed
Rasmussen 2003
    1. Rasmussen J. The role of error in organizing behaviour. 1990. Quality and Safety in Health Care 2003;12(5):377‐83. - PMC - PubMed
RevMan 2014 [Computer program]
    1. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.
Rostom 2013
    1. Rostom A, Ross ED, Dubé C, Rutter MD, Lee T, Valori R, et al. Development and validation of a nurse‐assessed patient comfort score for colonoscopy.. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2013;77(2):255‐61. - PubMed
Scalese 2008
    1. Scalese RJ, Obeso VT, Issenberg SB. Simulation technology for skills training and competency assessment in medical education. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2008;23(Suppl 1):46‐9. - PMC - PubMed
Schünemann 2013
    1. Schünemann H, Brozek J, Oxman A, editor(s). Handbook for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations using the GRADE approach (updated October 2013). GRADE Working Group, 2013. Available from gdt.guidelinedevelopment.org/app/handbook/handbook.html. The GRADE Working Group.
Sedlack 2002
    1. Sedlack RE. Development of a colonoscopy curriculum and performance based assessment criteria on a computer‐based endoscopy simulator. Academic Medicine 2002;77(7):750‐1. - PubMed
Sterne 2011
    1. Sterne JAC, Egger M, Moher D. Chapter 10: Addressing reporting bias. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
Sturm 2007
    1. Sturm L, Windsor J, Cregan P, Hewett P, Cosman P, Maddern G. Surgical simulation training: skills transfer to the operating room. ASERNIP‐S Report No. 61. Adelaide, South Australia: ASERNIP‐S, 2007. www.surgeons.org/media/300327/Surgicalsimulation_systematicreview.pdf (accessed 10 December 2017).
Swing 2002
    1. Swing SR. Assessing the ACGME general competencies: general considerations and assessment methods. Academic Emergency Medicine 2002;9(11):1278‐88. - PubMed
Vassiliou 2010
    1. Vassiliou MC, Kaneva PA, Poulose BK, Dunkin BJ, Marks JM, Sadik R, et al. Global assessment of gastrointestinal endoscopic skills (GAGES): a valid measurement tool for technical skills in flexible endoscopy. Surgical Endoscopy 2010;24(8):1834‐41. - PubMed
Vozenilek 2004
    1. Vozenilek J, Huff JS, Reznek M, Gordon JA. See one, do one, teach one: advanced technology in medical education. Academic Emergency Medicine 2004;11(11):1149‐54. - PubMed
Walsh 2008
    1. Walsh CM, Coopper MA, Rabeneck L, Carnahan H. Bench‐top versus virtual reality simulation training in endoscopy: expertise discrimination. Canadian Journal Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2008;22(Suppl A):164.
Walsh 2009
    1. Walsh CM, Ling SC, Wang CS, Carnahan H. Concurrent versus terminal feedback: it may be better to wait. Academic Medicine 2009;84(10 Suppl):S54‐7. - PubMed
Walsh 2016
    1. Walsh CM. In‐training gastrointestinal endoscopy competency assessment tools: types of tools, validation and impact. Best Practice and Research: Clinical Gastroenterology 2016;30(3):357‐74. - PubMed
WHO 2008
    1. World Health Organization. Classifying health workers: Mapping occupations to the international standard classification. www.who.int/hrh/statistics/Health_workers_classification.pdf?ua (accessed prior to 30 July 2018).
WHO 2013
    1. World Health Organization. Transforming and scaling up health professionals’ education and training: World Health Organization Education Guidelines 2013. www.who.int/hrh/resources/transf_scaling_hpet/en/ (accessed 20 March 2018).
Ziv 2003
    1. Ziv A, Wolpe PR, Small SD, Glick S. Simulation‐based medical education: an ethical imperative. Academic Medicine 2003;78(8):783‐8. - PubMed

References to other published versions of this review

Walsh 2012
    1. Walsh CM, Sherlock ME, Ling SC, Carnahan H. Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 6. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008237.pub2] - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources