N/A
N=37
Colonoscopic Skill Acquisition and Transfer Via Simulated Curriculum of Progressive Training
Colorectal Cancer
Bottom Line
View on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02000180 ↗Enrolled (actual)
37
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Feb 2018
Primary outcome: Primary: Difference Between Progressive and High-Fidelity Groups on Clinical Colonoscopy Peformance (JAG/DOPS) — 68.2; 59.0; 68.3; 59.1 units on a scale
Study Design & Population
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- N/A
- Interventions
- Progressive Group (Behavioral)
- Age
- Pediatric, Adult, Older Adult
- Sex
- All
- Sponsor
- Unity Health Toronto
- Primary completion
- Jul 2014
Outcome Measures
| Outcome | Result | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY Difference Between Progressive and High-Fidelity Groups on Clinical Colonoscopy Peformance (JAG/DOPS) |
68.2; 59.0; 68.3; 59.1 | — |
| SECONDARY Cognitive Knowledge of Endoscopy |
36.2; 28.6; 59.5; 59.5 | — |
| SECONDARY Colonoscopy Specific-performance. |
22.04; 21.05; 75.74; 65.96; 90.74; 77.54 | — |
| SECONDARY Colonoscopy Specific Performance, Communication Skills, and Global Performance on an Integrated Scenario |
68.88; 56.69; 73.89; 67.89; 73.15; 66.75 | — |
Summary
It is hypothesized that a progressive simulated learning strategy will result in better global clinical performance (e.g., technical, communication) and transfer of endoscopic skill, as compared with a high-fidelity simulation strategy.
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- novice endoscopists from Adult Gastroenterology, Pediatric Gastroenterology, General Surgery training programs at University of Toronto
Exclusion Criteria
- Trainees who have performed greater than 25 colonoscopies will be excluded to ensure all participants are novices.
Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02000180). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.