Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

NCT number NCT05674500
Other study ID # STU-2021-0829
Secondary ID
Status Completed
Phase N/A
First received
Last updated
Start date March 23, 2022
Est. completion date June 30, 2023

Study information

Verified date August 2023
Source University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
Contact n/a
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority
Study type Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The goal of this randomized control study is to determine if the use of standardized coaching language by faculty trainers for teaching colonoscopy is associated with improved colonoscopy performance. The main questions it aims to answer are: - If the use of standardized coaching language is effective in improving colonoscopy training? - If the use of standardized coaching language influences the clarity of instructions by the faculty trainers during colonoscopy teaching Participants will take part in simulated colonoscopy teaching encounter using a virtual reality simulator for 1 hour in 2 different sessions 2 weeks apart. Researchers will compare 2 groups of faculty trainers to to see if the standardized coaching language effects the colonoscopy training quality.


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Completed
Enrollment 25
Est. completion date June 30, 2023
Est. primary completion date May 30, 2023
Accepts healthy volunteers Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Gender All
Age group 18 Years and older
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria: - Faculty members who are endoscopy trainers in either pediatric or adult gastroenterology division at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center or Children's Medical Center, Dallas - Fellow trainees in pediatric or adult gastroenterology division at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center or Children's Medical Center, Dallas Exclusion Criteria: - Advanced endoscopy fellows - Fellows beyond Post-Graduate Year-6 (PGY-6)

Study Design


Related Conditions & MeSH terms


Intervention

Other:
Educational Training on standardized coaching language
The faculty trainer participants in training groups will watch a 15-min long video between the two simulated endoscopy teaching encounters. The video link will be emailed to them 1 week before the second simulated encounter, and they can watch it in their own time. The training video will demonstrate the use of recommended coaching language for endoscopy instruction (e.g., recommended 14 standard terms, need to refer to the screen when directing a trainee as opposed to their hands, use of a clockface analogy) and communication best practices (e.g., checking to ensure understanding, avoidance of cognitive overload, task deconstruction).
Educational Training on goal setting
The faculty trainer participants in the control groups will watch a 15-min long video between the two simulated endoscopy teaching encounters. The video link will be emailed to them 1 week before the second simulated encounter, and they can watch it in their own time. The video will be a 'dummy' colonoscopy training video which outlines how to set goals ahead of an endoscopy training session. The video will not discuss standardized coaching language and/or communication best practices.

Locations

Country Name City State
United States UTSW Dallas Texas

Sponsors (2)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center The Hospital for Sick Children

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

References & Publications (20)

Barton JR, Corbett S, van der Vleuten CP; English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme; 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. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Mar;75(3):591-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.09.053. Epub 2012 Jan 9. — View Citation

Broekaert I, Tzivinikos C, Narula P, Antunes H, Dias JA, van der Doef H, Isoldi S, Norsa L, Romano C, Scheers I, Silbermintz A, Tavares M, Torroni F, Urs A, Thomson M. European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Position Paper on Training in Paediatric Endoscopy. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2020 Jan;70(1):127-140. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000002496. No abstract available. — View Citation

Coderre S, Anderson J, Rostom A, McLaughlin K. Training the endoscopy trainer: from general principles to specific concepts. Can J Gastroenterol. 2010 Dec;24(12):700-4. doi: 10.1155/2010/493578. — View Citation

Dilly CK, Sewell JL. How to Give Feedback During Endoscopy Training. Gastroenterology. 2017 Sep;153(3):632-636. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.07.023. Epub 2017 Jul 27. No abstract available. — View Citation

Gavin DR, Valori RM, Anderson JT, Donnelly MT, Williams JG, Swarbrick ET. The national colonoscopy audit: a nationwide assessment of the quality and safety of colonoscopy in the UK. Gut. 2013 Feb;62(2):242-9. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-301848. Epub 2012 Jun 1. Erratum In: Gut. 2013 Feb;62(2):249. — View Citation

Kennedy TJ, Lingard LA. Making sense of grounded theory in medical education. Med Educ. 2006 Feb;40(2):101-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02378.x. — View Citation

Khan R, Zheng E, Wani SB, Scaffidi MA, Jeyalingam T, Gimpaya N, Anderson JT, Grover SC, McCreath G, Walsh CM. Colonoscopy competence assessment tools: a systematic review of validity evidence. Endoscopy. 2021 Dec;53(12):1235-1245. doi: 10.1055/a-1352-7293. Epub 2021 Mar 16. — View Citation

Lauridsen KG, Watanabe I, Lofgren B, Cheng A, Duval-Arnould J, Hunt EA, Good GL, Niles D, Berg RA, Nishisaki A, Nadkarni VM. Standardising communication to improve in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation. 2020 Feb 1;147:73-80. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2019.12.013. Epub 2019 Dec 28. — View Citation

Sewell JL, Boscardin CK, Young JQ, Ten Cate O, O'Sullivan PS. Measuring cognitive load during procedural skills training with colonoscopy as an exemplar. Med Educ. 2016 Jun;50(6):682-92. doi: 10.1111/medu.12965. — View Citation

Sewell JL, Bowen JL, Cate OT, O'Sullivan PS, Shah B, Boscardin CK. Learning Challenges, Teaching Strategies, and Cognitive Load: Insights From the Experience of Seasoned Endoscopy Teachers. Acad Med. 2020 May;95(5):794-802. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002946. — View Citation

Sewell JL, Young JQ, Boscardin CK, Ten Cate O, O'Sullivan PS. Trainee perception of cognitive load during observed faculty staff teaching of procedural skills. Med Educ. 2019 Sep;53(9):925-940. doi: 10.1111/medu.13914. Epub 2019 Jun 9. — View Citation

Siau K, Crossley J, Dunckley P, Johnson G, Feeney M, Iacucci M, Anderson JT; Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG). Colonoscopy Direct Observation of Procedural Skills Assessment Tool for Evaluating Competency Development During Training. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020 Feb;115(2):234-243. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000426. — View Citation

Siau K, Dunckley P, Valori R, Feeney M, Hawkes ND, Anderson JT, Beales ILP, Wells C, Thomas-Gibson S, Johnson G; Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG). Changes in scoring of Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) forms and the impact on competence assessment. Endoscopy. 2018 Aug;50(8):770-778. doi: 10.1055/a-0576-6667. Epub 2018 Apr 3. Erratum In: Endoscopy. 2018 Aug;50(8):C9. — View Citation

Siau K, Green JT, Hawkes ND, Broughton R, Feeney M, Dunckley P, Barton JR, Stebbing J, Thomas-Gibson S. Impact of the Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) on endoscopy services in the UK and beyond. Frontline Gastroenterol. 2019 Apr;10(2):93-106. doi: 10.1136/flgastro-2018-100969. Epub 2018 Nov 13. — View Citation

Walsh CM, Anderson JT, Fishman DS. Evidence-based Approach to Training Pediatric Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Trainers. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2017 Apr;64(4):501-504. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000001473. — View Citation

Walsh CM, Ling SC, Khanna N, Grover SC, Yu JJ, Cooper MA, Yong E, Nguyen GC, May G, Walters TD, Reznick R, Rabeneck L, Carnahan H. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool: reliability and validity evidence. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81(6):1417-1424.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.11.030. Epub 2015 Mar 7. — View Citation

Walsh CM, Ling SC, Mamula P, Lightdale JR, Walters TD, Yu JJ, Carnahan H. The gastrointestinal endoscopy competency assessment tool for pediatric colonoscopy. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2015 Apr;60(4):474-80. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000000686. — View Citation

Walsh CM. In-training gastrointestinal endoscopy competency assessment tools: Types of tools, validation and impact. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016 Jun;30(3):357-74. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2016.04.001. Epub 2016 Apr 16. — View Citation

Waschke KA, Anderson J, Macintosh D, Valori RM. Training the gastrointestinal endoscopy trainer. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016 Jun;30(3):409-19. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2016.05.001. Epub 2016 May 14. — View Citation

Zawadzki M, Gomez Ruiz M, Tou S, Jeffels A, Matzel KE. A proposed system for standardized terminology in minimally invasive surgery - a video vignette. Colorectal Dis. 2020 Dec;22(12):2346-2347. doi: 10.1111/codi.15309. Epub 2020 Sep 16. No abstract available. — View Citation

* Note: There are 20 references in allClick here to view all references

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Primary Change in colonoscopy performance The de-identified video-recording of the simulated colonoscopy will be assessed by blinded external rater.
This will be done using the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool (GiECAT) which is a colonoscopy assessment tool with strong validity evidence. For the GiECAT, 6 global rating items on supervision scale (measuring from 1 to 5) and 5 checklist items which are applicable to simulated procedures (i.e., no patients involved) will be used. Since it is a competency based tool with a checklist, there is no maximum score, but instead is a rating scale.
To ensure blinding, only the trainee's gloved hands will be seen, and the videos used for assessment of colonoscopy performance will not have sound to control for any effects the faculty instruction may have on the ratings of performance.
Change from Baseline colonoscopy performance at 2 weeks
Primary Change in colonoscopy performance The de-identified video-recording of the simulated colonoscopy will be assessed by blinded external rater.
This will be done using another colonoscopy assessment form with strong validity evidence - 8 'Procedure' items from the Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy (JAG) Colonoscopy Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) form. This is a supervision-based scale (measuring from 1 to 4). Since this is also a competency based tool with a checklist, it has a rating scale with no maximum score.
To ensure blinding, only the trainee's gloved hands will be seen, and the videos used for assessment of colonoscopy performance will not have sound to control for any effects the faculty instruction may have on the ratings of performance.
Change from Baseline colonoscopy performance at 2 weeks
Secondary Change in 'Red-out' time The percentage of procedure time during which the endoscope tip (camera) was against the mucosa of the virtual bowel (i.e., there was no proper visualization of the bowel mucosa - appears as 'reddened out screen', aka 'red-out'), as auto-generated automatically by the colonoscopy simulator. The percentage ranges from 0 to 100. Change from baseline time in red-out at 2 weeks
Secondary Change in time to cecum The time it took the trainee to reach the cecum, as auto-generated automatically by the colonoscopy simulator. This is reported in minutes and seconds (min:sec). The range from 0 to 20 minutes Change from baseline time to cecum at 2 weeks
Secondary Change in Cognitive load Printed forms will be given to all participants immediately after the pre-and post-sessions to measure the cognitive load. It will be measured by 3 measurement tools (Outcome 5-7) Overall cognitive load: A single item rating tool asking participants to rate the amount of mental effort they required to complete the simulated endoscopy on a 9-point scale (1 = very, very small effort and 9 = very, very high effort). Change from Baseline cognitive load at 2 weeks
Secondary Change in Cognitive load Printed forms will be given to all participants immediately after the pre-and post-sessions to measure the cognitive load.
NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX): A 6-item rating scale with strong validity evidence that assesses perceived demand, effort and frustration in performing the task, with higher scores indicating an increased cognitive load (Ranges from 0 to 20).
Change from Baseline cognitive load at 2 weeks
Secondary Change in Cognitive load Printed forms will be given to all participants immediately after the pre-and post-sessions to measure the cognitive load.
Cognitive Load Index for Colonoscopy (for trainees ONLY): A measure of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load related to performing colonoscopy. Fifteen items that are applicable to the simulation will be rated. Given the nature of this scale, it will be administered to trainees only. Scale ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree).
Change from Baseline cognitive load at 2 weeks
Secondary Change in the Clarity of instruction (trainee's perception) The clarity of instruction will be rated by the trainee on a Likert scale, using linguistics specific metrics developed an expert in linguistics. Description-based scale with following categories- Excellent, Satisfactory, Needs Improvement and Not Acceptable.
This form will be provided to the trainees only to assess their perception of the instructions provided by the faculty instructor.
Change from Baseline trainer's language assessment at 2 weeks
Secondary Change in the trainer's language (assessed by linguistics expert) Based on the de-identified video recordings, the trainer's clarity of instructions and use of recommended language will be rated using specialized linguistic-designed assessment rubric by a blinded external linguistics expert.
Name of Measurement- Clarity of language and use of standardized terminology Measurement Tool- Linguistics rubric (descriptive rating scale, with following categories- Excellent, Satisfactory, Needs Improvement and Not Acceptable)
Change from Baseline trainer's language assessment at 2 weeks
Secondary Semi-structured interview of the trainees In order to complement and enhance the data from above mentioned assessment tools (i.e., clarity of instruction, cognitive load), trainees will be asked to participate in a short 10-15 minute interview with the PI and/or Co-PI after the they have completed all 4 simulated cases, to explore their perceptions of instruction provided. The interview guide has been adapted from a study examining gastroenterology trainees' perception of endoscopy training activities. Interviews will be transcribed (removing any identifiers) and coded qualitatively using a constant comparison approach to compare differences in trainee's perceptions between groups At 2 weeks
Secondary Semi-structured interview of the faculty instructor In order to explore faculty's perceptions of the training modality being tested, faculty participants will also be asked to participate in a separate 10-15 minute long semi-structured interview with the PI and/or co-PI, after completing the 2 simulation sessions with a trainee fellow. The interview guide has been adapted from a study exploring endoscopy trainers' experience in teaching endoscopy. Interview will be transcribed and coded qualitatively using a constant comparison approach to explore the faculty's perception of the instructional strategies. At 2 weeks
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Completed NCT04101097 - Training and Validation of Models of Factors to Predict Inadequate Bowel Preparation Colonoscopy
Completed NCT03247595 - Testing How Well Magnesium Citrate Capsules Work as Preparation for a Colonoscopy N/A
Completed NCT04214301 - An Open-Label Preference Evaluation of BLI800 Phase 4
Withdrawn NCT05754255 - Comparison of High-flow Oxygen With or Without Nasal Positive Airway Pressure (PAP) During Propofol Sedation for Colonoscopy in an Ambulatory Surgical Center N/A
Recruiting NCT02484105 - Comforting Conversation During Colonoscopy: A Trial on Patient Satisfaction Phase 4
Active, not recruiting NCT02264249 - Residual Gastric Volume in Same Day Versus Split Dose and Evening Before Bowel Preparation N/A
Completed NCT01964417 - The Comparative Study Between Bowel Preparation Method Phase 3
Terminated NCT01978509 - The Affect of Low-Volume Bowel Preparation for Hospitalized Patients Colonoscopies N/A
Recruiting NCT01685970 - Comparison of Same-day 2 Sachets Picosulfate Versus High Volume PEG for Afternoon Colonoscopy Phase 3
Completed NCT01518790 - Short Course, Single-dose PEG 3350 for Colonoscopy Prep in Children N/A
Recruiting NCT00748293 - Achievement of Better Examinee Compliance on Colon Cleansing Using Commercialized Low-Residue Diet N/A
Completed NCT00779649 - MoviPrep® Versus HalfLytely®, Low-VolUme PEG Solutions for Colon Cleansing: An InvesTigator-blindEd, Randomized, Trial Phase 4
Completed NCT00671177 - Clinical Evaluation of Water Immersion Colonoscopy Insertion Technique N/A
Completed NCT00380497 - Pico-Salax Versus Poly-Ethylene Glycol for Bowel Cleanout Before Colonoscopy in Children Phase 4
Recruiting NCT00160823 - Impact of a Self-Administered Information Leaflet on Adequacy of Colonic Cleansing for in-Hospital Patients Phase 3
Completed NCT00390598 - PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 4L Versus Senna Glycoside (Pursennid® Ex-Lax) 36mg and PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 2L for Large Bowel Cleansing Prior to Colonoscopy Phase 2/Phase 3
Completed NCT00314418 - Patient Position and Impact on Colonoscopy Time N/A
Completed NCT00209573 - A Study of AQUAVAN® Injection Versus Midazolam HCl for Sedation in Patients Undergoing Elective Colonoscopy Phase 3
Completed NCT00427089 - Comparison of 2L NRL994 With NaP Preparation in Colon Cleansing Prior to Colonoscopies for Colon Tumor Screening Phase 3
Completed NCT05823350 - The Effect of Abdominal Massage on Pain and Distention After Colonoscopy N/A