Face and construct validity of a computer-based virtual reality simulator for ERCP - 22/08/11

Doi : 10.1016/j.gie.2009.08.033

James G. Bittner, MD, John D. Mellinger, MD, FACS ^⁎, Toufic Imam, MD, Robert R. Schade, MD, FACG, Bruce V. MacFadyen, MD, FACS
Current affiliations: Department of Surgery (J.G.B., J.D.M., B.V.M.), the Virtual Education and Surgical Simulation Laboratory (J.G.B., J.D.M., T.I., B.V.M.), and the Department of Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (R.R.S.), Medical College of Georgia School of Medicine, Augusta, Georgia, Department of Surgery (T.I.), Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

Reprint requests: John D. Mellinger, MD, FACS, Department of Surgery, Medical College of Georgia School of Medicine, 1120 15th St, Augusta, GA 30912.

Augusta, Georgia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

Abstract

Background

Currently, little evidence supports computer-based simulation for ERCP training.

Objective

To determine face and construct validity of a computer-based simulator for ERCP and assess its perceived utility as a training tool.

Design

Novice and expert endoscopists completed 2 simulated ERCP cases by using the GI Mentor II.

Setting

Virtual Education and Surgical Simulation Laboratory, Medical College of Georgia.

Main Outcome Measurements

Outcomes included times to complete the procedure, reach the papilla, and use fluoroscopy; attempts to cannulate the papilla, pancreatic duct, and common bile duct; and number of contrast injections and complications. Subjects assessed simulator graphics, procedural accuracy, difficulty, haptics, overall realism, and training potential.

Results

Only when performance data from cases A and B were combined did the GI Mentor II differentiate novices and experts based on times to complete the procedure, reach the papilla, and use fluoroscopy. Across skill levels, overall opinions were similar regarding graphics (moderately realistic), accuracy (similar to clinical ERCP), difficulty (similar to clinical ERCP), overall realism (moderately realistic), and haptics. Most participants (92%) claimed that the simulator has definite training potential or should be required for training.

Limitations

Small sample size, single institution.

Conclusions

The GI Mentor II demonstrated construct validity for ERCP based on select metrics. Most subjects thought that the simulated graphics, procedural accuracy, and overall realism exhibit face validity. Subjects deemed it a useful training tool. Study repetition involving more participants and cases may help confirm results and establish the simulator’s ability to differentiate skill levels based on ERCP-specific metrics.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Abbreviation : ASGE

Plan

Materials and methods

	DISCLOSURE: All authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication.
	If you would like to chat with an author of this article, you may contact Dr. Bittner at jbittner@mcg.edu.