P235 Development and validation of the direct observation of barrett’s imaging/endotherapy skills (DOBES) assessment tools

IntroductionEndoscopic resection (ER) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have become the standard of care worldwide for treatment of early Barrett’s neoplasia. Procedural outcomes are highly dependent on the operator skill and training. Validated tools for assessment of competency in these 2 procedur...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Gut 2021-01, Vol.70 (Suppl 1), p.A163-A164
Hauptverfasser: McGoran, John, Caestecker, John de, Sweis, Rami, Smart, Howard, Barr, Hugh, Trudgill, Nigel, diPietro, Massimiliano, Haidry, Rehan, Banks, Matt, Graham, David, Lovat, Laurence, Ragunath, Krish, Sami, Sarmed
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:IntroductionEndoscopic resection (ER) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have become the standard of care worldwide for treatment of early Barrett’s neoplasia. Procedural outcomes are highly dependent on the operator skill and training. Validated tools for assessment of competency in these 2 procedures are currently lacking. We aimed to develop and validate ER and RFA tools for use in clinical practice.MethodsA working group of 15 experts who met one or more of the predefined inclusion criteria was set up. Using published evidence-based criteria, the group devised a structured checklist of graded competency descriptors (scores ranged from 1=required maximal supervision to 4=competent). The latter were grouped into four main competency domains, namely: pre-procedural; specific skills; post-procedural; and endoscopic non-technical skills (ENTS). Consensus agreement and piloting was undertaken to ensure content validity.Construct validity was measured by independent assessment of 60 videos per procedure of ER and RFA by 7 assessors (selected from the working group) in a random manner. Procedures were performed by 15 operators with variable expertise including experts and trainees. Statistical analysis was performed using Generalizability theory, which analysed ‘variability components’ between: operators; cases; assessors; assessors across (x) operators; and unexplained variation.ResultsData on a minimum of 45 videos per procedure were available for analysis. The mean (± standard deviation) competency scores were 3.4 (0.8) and 3.7 (0.6) for ER and RFA, respectively. The variability components for the analysis are detailed in table 1. Variation in scores between operators, assessors, and assessors across different operators was small accounting for
ISSN:0017-5749
1468-3288
DOI:10.1136/gutjnl-2020-bsgcampus.309