Competency Based EducationRATES 2NCT02509416
Rapid Assessment of Trainee Endoscopy Skills (RATES) Study Two
An observational study of Competency Based Education, run by University of Colorado, Denver.
Trial summary
The establishment of a number of training programs in therapeutic endoscopy, standardization of the performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopy retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and definition of competence is of paramount importance. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 85 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Competency Based Education
- How many people
- 37 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Jul 2015to 15 Jun 2017
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 85 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Program directors and AETs at all advanced endoscopy programs registered with the ASGE will be invited to participate in this study and will be considered as study participants.
Who may be able to join
- Program directors and AETs at all advanced endoscopy programs registered with the ASGE will be invited to participate in this study and will be considered as study participants.
Who cannot join
- N/A
About this study
Official title: Rapid Assessment of Trainee Endoscopy Skills (RATES) Study Two: A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Competence in Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatogram Among Advanced Endoscopy Trainees
The establishment of a number of training programs in therapeutic endoscopy, standardization of the performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopy retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and definition of competence is of paramount importance. The length of training and minimum number of procedures, requisite theoretical learning and methodology to define competence in EUS and ERCP are not well defined. The investigators research has demonstrated that individuals in training acquire skills at different rates and the number of procedures completed alone is a suboptimal marker for competency in a given procedure. Hence, emphasis needs to be shifted away from the number of procedures performed to performance metrics with well-defined and validated thresholds of performance. Multicenter prospective data are needed to help guide development of competency based medical education that define learning curves in EUS and ERCP and set evidence-based benchmarks required to achieve competence using a validated competency assessment tool.
Hypothesis: The central hypothesis is that a validated EUS and ERCP competency assessment tool will allow for reliable and generalizable standardized learning curves, competency benchmarks and creation of a centralized national database that compares a trainee's performance amongst peers.
Read the detailed description
Competency-based medical education and milestones: Given the increasing emphasis on quality metrics and competency in health care, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) recently announced plans to replace their current reporting system in 2014 with the Next Accreditation System (NAS). This reporting system focused on: 1) ensuring that milestones are reached at various points in training, 2) ensuring that competence is achieved by all trainees, and 3) making certain that these assessments are documented by their programs.
Learning curves and competence in EUS: EUS is a vital tool in the diagnosis and staging of gastrointestinal and certain non-gastrointestinal malignancies and diseases. EUS is operator dependent and training in EUS requires the development of technical and cognitive skills beyond that required for standard endoscopic procedures. It is intuitive that the quality of EUS in provision of patient care is directly proportional to the training, skill and experience of the endosonographer. Unfortunately, the intensity and length of training and minimum number of procedures required, requisite curriculum and extent of theoretical learning, and methodology to define competence are not well defined. There are limited data on learning curves in EUS imaging.Based on expert opinion, the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) recommends a minimum of 150 total supervised procedures, 75 of which have a pancreatobiliary indication and 50 cases of fine needle aspiration (FNA) (25 of which are pancreatic FNA) before competency can be determined.
Similar guidelines were recently proposed by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG)13 and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. However, these guidelines have not been validated. This does not account for the different rates at which people learn and in fact, many experts believe that the majority of trainees will require double the number of proposed procedures to achieve competency in EUS.
Learning curves and competence in ERCP: ERCP is an effective modality in the evaluation and management of pancreatobiliary diseases. This procedure can be technically demanding and associated with a wide range of adverse events. Technically failed ERCP may result in complications, need for additional procedures and their associated costs. Similar to EUS, ERCP is operator dependent and requires acquisition of certain technical and cognitive skills. There are limited data on learning curves and competence in ERCP, a cannulation rate of >80% (with some suggesting >90%) has been considered a surrogate for trainee competency. The ASGE recommends a minimum of 180 total procedures, the majority of which are therapeutic before competency can be achieved. However, this threshold is based predominantly on biliary cannulation success rate and does not take into account procedure complexity and the different rates at which people learn. It is also important to note that none of the previous studies have evaluated learning curves and competency in other quality indicators such as successful stone extraction, traversing and dilating a stricture, stent placement to name a few.
Competency assessment tools: Previous competency assessment tools have focused primarily on a limited number of motor skills involved in EUS and ERCP with no procedure-related cognitive skill assessment. The investigators have designed a prospective comprehensive competency assessment tool using validated benchmarks to define competency thresholds. The EUS and ERCP Skills Assessment Tool (TEESAT) can be used in a continuous fashion throughout the duration of training to grade technical and cognitive skills in EUS and ERCP in a balanced manner.
Significance, Innovation and Impact on Training and Education with the launch of the ACGME's NAS, advanced endoscopy training programs should utilize competency based medical education and demonstrate that advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs) have attained the technical and cognitive skills required for safe and effective unsupervised practice in advanced endoscopy. Based on the investigators research, the investigators can draw two conclusions: a) individuals in training in any technical procedure acquire skills at different rates and emphasis needs to be shifted away from the number of procedures performed to performance metrics with defined and validated competency thresholds of performance and b) current guidelines of performing 150 EUS and 180 ERCPs are inadequate to achieve competence in EUS and ERCP, respectively. With the expanding indications and applications of EUS and ERCP and establishment of a number of "third tier" training programs in advanced endoscopy, standardization of the performance of EUS and ERCP and definition of competence and training among AETs is of paramount importance. The potential impacts of this study's results are multifold: i) facilitate the ability of training programs to evolve with the new ACGME/NAS reporting requirements, (ii) help program directors/trainers and trainees identify specific skill deficiencies in training and allowing for tailored, individualized remediation, (iii) create a centralized national database that would allow generation of "on-demand" detailed reports on how individual trainees are progressing compared with their peers across the nation, (iv) establish reliable and generalizable standardized learning curves (milestones) and competency benchmarks that national GI societies and training programs can use to develop credentialing guidelines.
APPROACH AND RESEARCH STRATEGY Setting and Subject Recruitment: Program directors and AETs at all advanced endoscopy programs registered with the ASGE will be invited to participate in this study and will be considered as study participants. AETs will complete a questionnaire to determine baseline characteristics and prior experience with EUS and ERCP. AETs' prior experience with EUS and ERCP will not be an exclusion criterion for this study.
Competency assessment tools: Previous competency assessment tools have focused primarily on a limited number of motor skills involved in EUS and ERCP with no procedure-related cognitive skill assessment. The investigators have designed a prospective comprehensive competency assessment tool using validated benchmarks to define competency thresholds. The EUS and ERCP Skills Assessment Tool (TEESAT) can be used in a continuous fashion throughout the duration of training to grade technical and cognitive skills in EUS and ERCP in a balanced manner.
Learning curves during independent practice and Quality Indicators in EUS and ERCP: The ASGE and ACG Task Force on Quality in Endoscopy recently published documents highlighting quality indicators in EUS and ERCP. Impact of structured feedback on learning curves, specifically related to quality metrics, during the first year of independent practice for AETs has not been evaluated. This is an important component of construct validity for the proposed assessment tool and novel web-based comprehensive data collection and reporting, was identified as a priority research question by the Task Force. The defined performance targets and quality metrics will serve as benchmarks for analysis during training and first year of independent practice.
- Conditions
- Competency Based Education
- Keywords
- endoscopic ultrasound, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, competency
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Overall competency
The proportion of advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs) that achieve overall competency in EUS and ERCP using a standardized competency assessment tool with a comprehensive data collection and reporting system.
Measured: Up to 12 months
Secondary outcomes (1)
Number of advanced endoscopy fellows that reach competency
Creation of a nationalized database utilizing the comprehensive assessment tool as to have advanced endoscopy fellows compare themselves to the national average in EUS and ERCP exams.
Measured: Up to 12 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted28 Jul 2015 (estimated)
- Study startJul 2015
- Primary completion15 Jun 2017
- Study completion15 Jun 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Competency Based EducationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of Colorado, DenverThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 37 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Colorado, Denver
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Columbia University, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Carolinas Medical Center, The Cleveland Clinic, Duke University, Emory University, Geisinger Clinic, St. Luke's Medical Center, Johns Hopkins University, Northwestern University, Stanford University, Stony Brook University, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, University of Alberta, University of California, Los Angeles, University of Florida, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, University of Michigan, University of Pennsylvania, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, University of Texas, University of Virginia, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Virginia Mason Hospital/Medical Center, Henry Ford Hospital, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Mayo Clinic, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, University of California, Davis, Indiana University, University of Kansas, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Washington University School of Medicine, University of North Carolina
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Sachin Wani, MD, Principal investigator, University of Colorado, Denver
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02509416
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 14-0604-2
- Acronym
- RATES 2
- Status last verified
- Aug 2021
- First submitted
- 1 Jul 2015
- Last updated
- 17 Aug 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Wani S, Han S, Simon V, Hall M, Early D, Aagaard E, Abidi WM, Banerjee S, Baron TH, Bartel M, Bowman E, Brauer BC, Buscaglia JM, Carlin L, Chak A, Chatrath H, Choudhary A, Confer B, Cote GA, Das KK, DiMaio CJ, Dries AM, Edmundowicz SA, El Chafic AH, El Hajj I, Ellert S, Ferreira J, Gamboa A, Gan IS, Gangarosa L, Gannavarapu B, Gordon SR, Guda NM, Hammad HT, Harris C, Jalaj S, Jowell P, Kenshil S, Klapman J, Kochman ML, Komanduri S, Lang G, Lee LS, Loren DE, Lukens FJ, Mullady D, Muthusamy RV, Nett AS, Olyaee MS, Pakseresht K, Perera P, Pfau P, Piraka C, Poneros JM, Rastogi A, Razzak A, Riff B, Saligram S, Scheiman JM, Schuster I, Shah RJ, Sharma R, Spaete JP, Singh A, Sohail M, Sreenarasimhaiah J, Stevens T, Tabibian JH, Tzimas D, Uppal DS, Urayama S, Vitterbo D, Wang AY, Wassef W, Yachimski P, Zepeda-Gomez S, Zuchelli T, Keswani RN. Setting minimum standards for training in EUS and ERCP: results from a prospective multicenter study evaluating learning curves and competence among advanced endoscopy trainees. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jun;89(6):1160-1168.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.01.030. Epub 2019 Feb 7.
PubMed 30738985Wani S, Keswani RN, Han S, Aagaard EM, Hall M, Simon V, Abidi WM, Banerjee S, Baron TH, Bartel M, Bowman E, Brauer BC, Buscaglia JM, Carlin L, Chak A, Chatrath H, Choudhary A, Confer B, Cote GA, Das KK, DiMaio CJ, Dries AM, Edmundowicz SA, El Chafic AH, El Hajj I, Ellert S, Ferreira J, Gamboa A, Gan IS, Gangarosa LM, Gannavarapu B, Gordon SR, Guda NM, Hammad HT, Harris C, Jalaj S, Jowell PS, Kenshil S, Klapman J, Kochman ML, Komanduri S, Lang G, Lee LS, Loren DE, Lukens FJ, Mullady D, Muthusamy VR, Nett AS, Olyaee MS, Pakseresht K, Perera P, Pfau P, Piraka C, Poneros JM, Rastogi A, Razzak A, Riff B, Saligram S, Scheiman JM, Schuster I, Shah RJ, Sharma R, Spaete JP, Singh A, Sohail M, Sreenarasimhaiah J, Stevens T, Tabibian JH, Tzimas D, Uppal DS, Urayama S, Vitterbo D, Wang AY, Wassef W, Yachimski P, Zepeda-Gomez S, Zuchelli T, Early D. Competence in Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography, From Training Through Independent Practice. Gastroenterology. 2018 Nov;155(5):1483-1494.e7. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.07.024. Epub 2018 Jul 26.
PubMed 30056094Wani S, Keswani R, Hall M, Han S, Ali MA, Brauer B, Carlin L, Chak A, Collins D, Cote GA, Diehl DL, DiMaio CJ, Dries A, El-Hajj I, Ellert S, Fairley K, Faulx A, Fujii-Lau L, Gaddam S, Gan SI, Gaspar JP, Gautamy C, Gordon S, Harris C, Hyder S, Jones R, Kim S, Komanduri S, Law R, Lee L, Mounzer R, Mullady D, Muthusamy VR, Olyaee M, Pfau P, Saligram S, Piraka C, Rastogi A, Rosenkranz L, Rzouq F, Saxena A, Shah RJ, Simon VC, Small A, Sreenarasimhaiah J, Walker A, Wang AY, Watson RR, Wilson RH, Yachimski P, Yang D, Edmundowicz S, Early DS. A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Learning Curves and Competence in Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Among Advanced Endoscopy Trainees: The Rapid Assessment of Trainee Endoscopy Skills Study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017 Nov;15(11):1758-1767.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.06.012. Epub 2017 Jun 16.
PubMed 28625816
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Aug 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Rapid Assessment of Trainee Endoscopy Skills (RATES) Study Two: A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Competence in Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatogram Among Advanced Endoscopy Trainees
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02509416
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- RATES 2 / 14-0604-2
- Conditions
- Competency Based Education
- Keywords
- endoscopic ultrasound, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, competency
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 37 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Colorado, DenverUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Columbia University, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Carolinas Medical Center, The Cleveland Clinic, Duke University, Emory University, Geisinger Clinic, St. Luke's Medical Center, Johns Hopkins University, Northwestern University, Stanford University, Stony Brook University, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, University of Alberta, University of California, Los Angeles, University of Florida, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, University of Michigan, University of Pennsylvania, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, University of Texas, University of Virginia, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Virginia Mason Hospital/Medical Center, Henry Ford Hospital, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Mayo Clinic, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, University of California, Davis, Indiana University, University of Kansas, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Washington University School of Medicine, University of North Carolina
- Study start
- Jul 2015
- Primary completion
- 15 Jun 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 15 Jun 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 28 Jul 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The establishment of a number of training programs in therapeutic endoscopy, standardization of the performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopy retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and definition of competence is of paramount importance. The length of training and minimum number of procedures, requisite theoretical learning and methodology to define competence in EUS and ERCP are not well defined. The investigators research has demonstrated that individuals in training acquire skills at different rates and the number of procedures completed alone is a suboptimal marker for competency in a given procedure. Hence, emphasis needs to be shifted away from the number of procedures performed to performance metrics with well-defined and validated thresholds of performance. Multicenter prospective data are needed to help guide development of competency based medical education that define learning curves in EUS and ERCP and set evidence-based benchmarks required to achieve competence using a validated competency assessment tool.
Hypothesis: The central hypothesis is that a validated EUS and ERCP competency assessment tool will allow for reliable and generalizable standardized learning curves, competency benchmarks and creation of a centralized national database that compares a trainee's performance amongst peers.
Detailed description
Competency-based medical education and milestones: Given the increasing emphasis on quality metrics and competency in health care, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) recently announced plans to replace their current reporting system in 2014 with the Next Accreditation System (NAS). This reporting system focused on: 1) ensuring that milestones are reached at various points in training, 2) ensuring that competence is achieved by all trainees, and 3) making certain that these assessments are documented by their programs.
Learning curves and competence in EUS: EUS is a vital tool in the diagnosis and staging of gastrointestinal and certain non-gastrointestinal malignancies and diseases. EUS is operator dependent and training in EUS requires the development of technical and cognitive skills beyond that required for standard endoscopic procedures. It is intuitive that the quality of EUS in provision of patient care is directly proportional to the training, skill and experience of the endosonographer. Unfortunately, the intensity and length of training and minimum number of procedures required, requisite curriculum and extent of theoretical learning, and methodology to define competence are not well defined. There are limited data on learning curves in EUS imaging.Based on expert opinion, the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) recommends a minimum of 150 total supervised procedures, 75 of which have a pancreatobiliary indication and 50 cases of fine needle aspiration (FNA) (25 of which are pancreatic FNA) before competency can be determined.
Similar guidelines were recently proposed by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG)13 and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. However, these guidelines have not been validated. This does not account for the different rates at which people learn and in fact, many experts believe that the majority of trainees will require double the number of proposed procedures to achieve competency in EUS.
Learning curves and competence in ERCP: ERCP is an effective modality in the evaluation and management of pancreatobiliary diseases. This procedure can be technically demanding and associated with a wide range of adverse events. Technically failed ERCP may result in complications, need for additional procedures and their associated costs. Similar to EUS, ERCP is operator dependent and requires acquisition of certain technical and cognitive skills. There are limited data on learning curves and competence in ERCP, a cannulation rate of >80% (with some suggesting >90%) has been considered a surrogate for trainee competency. The ASGE recommends a minimum of 180 total procedures, the majority of which are therapeutic before competency can be achieved. However, this threshold is based predominantly on biliary cannulation success rate and does not take into account procedure complexity and the different rates at which people learn. It is also important to note that none of the previous studies have evaluated learning curves and competency in other quality indicators such as successful stone extraction, traversing and dilating a stricture, stent placement to name a few.
Competency assessment tools: Previous competency assessment tools have focused primarily on a limited number of motor skills involved in EUS and ERCP with no procedure-related cognitive skill assessment. The investigators have designed a prospective comprehensive competency assessment tool using validated benchmarks to define competency thresholds. The EUS and ERCP Skills Assessment Tool (TEESAT) can be used in a continuous fashion throughout the duration of training to grade technical and cognitive skills in EUS and ERCP in a balanced manner.
Significance, Innovation and Impact on Training and Education with the launch of the ACGME's NAS, advanced endoscopy training programs should utilize competency based medical education and demonstrate that advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs) have attained the technical and cognitive skills required for safe and effective unsupervised practice in advanced endoscopy. Based on the investigators research, the investigators can draw two conclusions: a) individuals in training in any technical procedure acquire skills at different rates and emphasis needs to be shifted away from the number of procedures performed to performance metrics with defined and validated competency thresholds of performance and b) current guidelines of performing 150 EUS and 180 ERCPs are inadequate to achieve competence in EUS and ERCP, respectively. With the expanding indications and applications of EUS and ERCP and establishment of a number of "third tier" training programs in advanced endoscopy, standardization of the performance of EUS and ERCP and definition of competence and training among AETs is of paramount importance. The potential impacts of this study's results are multifold: i) facilitate the ability of training programs to evolve with the new ACGME/NAS reporting requirements, (ii) help program directors/trainers and trainees identify specific skill deficiencies in training and allowing for tailored, individualized remediation, (iii) create a centralized national database that would allow generation of "on-demand" detailed reports on how individual trainees are progressing compared with their peers across the nation, (iv) establish reliable and generalizable standardized learning curves (milestones) and competency benchmarks that national GI societies and training programs can use to develop credentialing guidelines.
APPROACH AND RESEARCH STRATEGY Setting and Subject Recruitment: Program directors and AETs at all advanced endoscopy programs registered with the ASGE will be invited to participate in this study and will be considered as study participants. AETs will complete a questionnaire to determine baseline characteristics and prior experience with EUS and ERCP. AETs' prior experience with EUS and ERCP will not be an exclusion criterion for this study.
Competency assessment tools: Previous competency assessment tools have focused primarily on a limited number of motor skills involved in EUS and ERCP with no procedure-related cognitive skill assessment. The investigators have designed a prospective comprehensive competency assessment tool using validated benchmarks to define competency thresholds. The EUS and ERCP Skills Assessment Tool (TEESAT) can be used in a continuous fashion throughout the duration of training to grade technical and cognitive skills in EUS and ERCP in a balanced manner.
Learning curves during independent practice and Quality Indicators in EUS and ERCP: The ASGE and ACG Task Force on Quality in Endoscopy recently published documents highlighting quality indicators in EUS and ERCP. Impact of structured feedback on learning curves, specifically related to quality metrics, during the first year of independent practice for AETs has not been evaluated. This is an important component of construct validity for the proposed assessment tool and novel web-based comprehensive data collection and reporting, was identified as a priority research question by the Task Force. The defined performance targets and quality metrics will serve as benchmarks for analysis during training and first year of independent practice.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 85 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Program directors and AETs at all advanced endoscopy programs registered with the ASGE will be invited to participate in this study and will be considered as study participants.
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Program directors and AETs at all advanced endoscopy programs registered with the ASGE will be invited to participate in this study and will be considered as study participants.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- N/A
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Overall competency
Time frame: Up to 12 months
The proportion of advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs) that achieve overall competency in EUS and ERCP using a standardized competency assessment tool with a comprehensive data collection and reporting system.
1 secondary outcome
Number of advanced endoscopy fellows that reach competency
Time frame: Up to 12 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Aug 2021.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 30738985Wani S, Han S, Simon V, Hall M, Early D, Aagaard E, Abidi WM, Banerjee S, Baron TH, Bartel M, Bowman E, Brauer BC, Buscaglia JM, Carlin L, Chak A, Chatrath H, Choudhary A, Confer B, Cote GA, Das KK, DiMaio CJ, Dries AM, Edmundowicz SA, El Chafic AH, El Hajj I, Ellert S, Ferreira J, Gamboa A, Gan IS, Gangarosa L, Gannavarapu B, Gordon SR, Guda NM, Hammad HT, Harris C, Jalaj S, Jowell P, Kenshil S, Klapman J, Kochman ML, Komanduri S, Lang G, Lee LS, Loren DE, Lukens FJ, Mullady D, Muthusamy RV, Nett AS, Olyaee MS, Pakseresht K, Perera P, Pfau P, Piraka C, Poneros JM, Rastogi A, Razzak A, Riff B, Saligram S, Scheiman JM, Schuster I, Shah RJ, Sharma R, Spaete JP, Singh A, Sohail M, Sreenarasimhaiah J, Stevens T, Tabibian JH, Tzimas D, Uppal DS, Urayama S, Vitterbo D, Wang AY, Wassef W, Yachimski P, Zepeda-Gomez S, Zuchelli T, Keswani RN. Setting minimum standards for training in EUS and ERCP: results from a prospective multicenter study evaluating learning curves and competence among advanced endoscopy trainees. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jun;89(6):1160-1168.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.01.030. Epub 2019 Feb 7.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 30056094Wani S, Keswani RN, Han S, Aagaard EM, Hall M, Simon V, Abidi WM, Banerjee S, Baron TH, Bartel M, Bowman E, Brauer BC, Buscaglia JM, Carlin L, Chak A, Chatrath H, Choudhary A, Confer B, Cote GA, Das KK, DiMaio CJ, Dries AM, Edmundowicz SA, El Chafic AH, El Hajj I, Ellert S, Ferreira J, Gamboa A, Gan IS, Gangarosa LM, Gannavarapu B, Gordon SR, Guda NM, Hammad HT, Harris C, Jalaj S, Jowell PS, Kenshil S, Klapman J, Kochman ML, Komanduri S, Lang G, Lee LS, Loren DE, Lukens FJ, Mullady D, Muthusamy VR, Nett AS, Olyaee MS, Pakseresht K, Perera P, Pfau P, Piraka C, Poneros JM, Rastogi A, Razzak A, Riff B, Saligram S, Scheiman JM, Schuster I, Shah RJ, Sharma R, Spaete JP, Singh A, Sohail M, Sreenarasimhaiah J, Stevens T, Tabibian JH, Tzimas D, Uppal DS, Urayama S, Vitterbo D, Wang AY, Wassef W, Yachimski P, Zepeda-Gomez S, Zuchelli T, Early D. Competence in Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography, From Training Through Independent Practice. Gastroenterology. 2018 Nov;155(5):1483-1494.e7. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.07.024. Epub 2018 Jul 26.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 28625816Wani S, Keswani R, Hall M, Han S, Ali MA, Brauer B, Carlin L, Chak A, Collins D, Cote GA, Diehl DL, DiMaio CJ, Dries A, El-Hajj I, Ellert S, Fairley K, Faulx A, Fujii-Lau L, Gaddam S, Gan SI, Gaspar JP, Gautamy C, Gordon S, Harris C, Hyder S, Jones R, Kim S, Komanduri S, Law R, Lee L, Mounzer R, Mullady D, Muthusamy VR, Olyaee M, Pfau P, Saligram S, Piraka C, Rastogi A, Rosenkranz L, Rzouq F, Saxena A, Shah RJ, Simon VC, Small A, Sreenarasimhaiah J, Walker A, Wang AY, Watson RR, Wilson RH, Yachimski P, Yang D, Edmundowicz S, Early DS. A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Learning Curves and Competence in Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Among Advanced Endoscopy Trainees: The Rapid Assessment of Trainee Endoscopy Skills Study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017 Nov;15(11):1758-1767.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.06.012. Epub 2017 Jun 16.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Competency Based Education
Not yet recruiting
SELF-ASSESSMENT AND KNOWLEDGE LEVEL OF NURSING STUDENTS' PATIENT SAFETY COMPETENCY
Simulation Training, Nursing Education
Not yet recruiting
Compression-Only Versus Standard Basic Life Support Training in Nursing Students
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
Active, not recruiting
Enhancing Male Nursing Students' Competence in Maternity Care: A Quasi-Experimental Study in Egypt
Maternity Nursing, Obstetric Nursing
Not yet recruiting
Simulation-Based Intrathecal Pump Refill Training
Intrathecal Drug Delivery
Not yet recruiting
Enhancing Practical Competence in Physical Assessment Through Digital Video Feedback
Physical Assessment Skills
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Sachin Wani, MD principal investigator
University of Colorado, Denver
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Competency Based Education, run by University of Colorado, Denver.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 17 Aug 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Overall competency (time frame: Up to 12 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02509416, which also lists 3 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 17 Aug 2021.