A direct comparison of ERCP teaching models

Robert Sedlack, Bret Thomas Petersen, Kenneth Binmoeller, Joseph Kolars

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

65 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Several teaching models for ERCP are now available. Live, anesthetized porcine models have been used for many years, but harvested porcine organ preparations have recently been developed, and computer-based endoscopy simulators now incorporate ERCP modules. Each has proven to be a useful educational modality, but there is no direct comparison among these models. This study compared the performance of these 3 ERCP teaching models. Methods: Twenty endoscopists used each ERCP training model (computer simulator, harvested porcine organ, live anesthetized pig) and then completed a survey grading the realism and performance of each model compared with performance of ERCP in patients. A rank order was established for the models relative to their realism, educational utility, ease of use, and ease of incorporation into a training program. Results: The harvested porcine organ model scored highest on indices of realism, usefulness, and performance, although this reached statistical significance only for "ease of use" (p < 0.05). Conversely, the computer simulator scored significantly lower in most realism scores, although it was felt to be the one model most easily incorporated into a training program. Conclusions: Although each ERCP teaching model has proven to be a useful training modality, the harvested porcine organ model was felt to be the most realistic as well as the most favorable model for instruction in both basic and advanced ERCP. (Gastrointest Endosc 2003;57:886-90.).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)886-890
Number of pages5
JournalGastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume57
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2003

Fingerprint

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography
Teaching
Swine
Education
Computer Simulation
Endoscopy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

A direct comparison of ERCP teaching models. / Sedlack, Robert; Petersen, Bret Thomas; Binmoeller, Kenneth; Kolars, Joseph.

In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Vol. 57, No. 7, 06.2003, p. 886-890.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sedlack, Robert ; Petersen, Bret Thomas ; Binmoeller, Kenneth ; Kolars, Joseph. / A direct comparison of ERCP teaching models. In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2003 ; Vol. 57, No. 7. pp. 886-890.
@article{ccc114a7a9ae415d9b8b1be2abce05b0,
title = "A direct comparison of ERCP teaching models",
abstract = "Background: Several teaching models for ERCP are now available. Live, anesthetized porcine models have been used for many years, but harvested porcine organ preparations have recently been developed, and computer-based endoscopy simulators now incorporate ERCP modules. Each has proven to be a useful educational modality, but there is no direct comparison among these models. This study compared the performance of these 3 ERCP teaching models. Methods: Twenty endoscopists used each ERCP training model (computer simulator, harvested porcine organ, live anesthetized pig) and then completed a survey grading the realism and performance of each model compared with performance of ERCP in patients. A rank order was established for the models relative to their realism, educational utility, ease of use, and ease of incorporation into a training program. Results: The harvested porcine organ model scored highest on indices of realism, usefulness, and performance, although this reached statistical significance only for {"}ease of use{"} (p < 0.05). Conversely, the computer simulator scored significantly lower in most realism scores, although it was felt to be the one model most easily incorporated into a training program. Conclusions: Although each ERCP teaching model has proven to be a useful training modality, the harvested porcine organ model was felt to be the most realistic as well as the most favorable model for instruction in both basic and advanced ERCP. (Gastrointest Endosc 2003;57:886-90.).",
author = "Robert Sedlack and Petersen, {Bret Thomas} and Kenneth Binmoeller and Joseph Kolars",
year = "2003",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1016/S0016-5107(03)70025-X",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "57",
pages = "886--890",
journal = "Gastrointestinal Endoscopy",
issn = "0016-5107",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A direct comparison of ERCP teaching models

AU - Sedlack, Robert

AU - Petersen, Bret Thomas

AU - Binmoeller, Kenneth

AU - Kolars, Joseph

PY - 2003/6

Y1 - 2003/6

N2 - Background: Several teaching models for ERCP are now available. Live, anesthetized porcine models have been used for many years, but harvested porcine organ preparations have recently been developed, and computer-based endoscopy simulators now incorporate ERCP modules. Each has proven to be a useful educational modality, but there is no direct comparison among these models. This study compared the performance of these 3 ERCP teaching models. Methods: Twenty endoscopists used each ERCP training model (computer simulator, harvested porcine organ, live anesthetized pig) and then completed a survey grading the realism and performance of each model compared with performance of ERCP in patients. A rank order was established for the models relative to their realism, educational utility, ease of use, and ease of incorporation into a training program. Results: The harvested porcine organ model scored highest on indices of realism, usefulness, and performance, although this reached statistical significance only for "ease of use" (p < 0.05). Conversely, the computer simulator scored significantly lower in most realism scores, although it was felt to be the one model most easily incorporated into a training program. Conclusions: Although each ERCP teaching model has proven to be a useful training modality, the harvested porcine organ model was felt to be the most realistic as well as the most favorable model for instruction in both basic and advanced ERCP. (Gastrointest Endosc 2003;57:886-90.).

AB - Background: Several teaching models for ERCP are now available. Live, anesthetized porcine models have been used for many years, but harvested porcine organ preparations have recently been developed, and computer-based endoscopy simulators now incorporate ERCP modules. Each has proven to be a useful educational modality, but there is no direct comparison among these models. This study compared the performance of these 3 ERCP teaching models. Methods: Twenty endoscopists used each ERCP training model (computer simulator, harvested porcine organ, live anesthetized pig) and then completed a survey grading the realism and performance of each model compared with performance of ERCP in patients. A rank order was established for the models relative to their realism, educational utility, ease of use, and ease of incorporation into a training program. Results: The harvested porcine organ model scored highest on indices of realism, usefulness, and performance, although this reached statistical significance only for "ease of use" (p < 0.05). Conversely, the computer simulator scored significantly lower in most realism scores, although it was felt to be the one model most easily incorporated into a training program. Conclusions: Although each ERCP teaching model has proven to be a useful training modality, the harvested porcine organ model was felt to be the most realistic as well as the most favorable model for instruction in both basic and advanced ERCP. (Gastrointest Endosc 2003;57:886-90.).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0141498381&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0141498381&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0016-5107(03)70025-X

DO - 10.1016/S0016-5107(03)70025-X

M3 - Article

C2 - 12776037

AN - SCOPUS:0141498381

VL - 57

SP - 886

EP - 890

JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

SN - 0016-5107

IS - 7

ER -