Strides in Development of Medical Education

Document Type : Brief report


Associate Professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Research Development Center, Sina Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran


  Background & Objective: Considering the possible risks of performing endoscopy training on patients the use of a moulage prior to training seems reasonable The aim of this study was to evaluate residents rate of satisfaction with the training process and their ability in performing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy using gastric moulage prepared in Sina Hospital Iran   Methods: This study was conducted on 20 residents of the endoscopy ward at Sina Hospital from September 2012 to September 2013 The endoscopy training program consisted of 3 steps of training with gastric moulage observation and training on human subjects The present educational development plan was evaluated through studying the 2 criteria of residents satisfaction and ability The satisfaction of residents with the endoscopy training course was evaluated by a selfreport questionnaire The residents ability in performing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was evaluated by measuring the time of reaching the gastroesophageal junction and pyloric valve   Results: The reliability and validity of the selfreport questionnaire were 64% (060089) and 78% (012095) respectively Over 90% of residents agreed with the items of the selfreport questionnaire The highest rate of agreement belonged to the item that interpreted the effect of this method on lowering residents anxiety in performing endoscopy (100%) The mean ± standard deviation of time of reaching the gastroesophageal junction and pyloric valve were 1620 ± 1354 and 2728 ± 1375 seconds respectively   Conclusion: The results of this study showed that training residents using gastric moulage prepared in Sina Hospital was associated with residents satisfaction and the successful obtaining of the endoscopy skill


  1. Cohen J. Simulation training in endoscopy. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008; 4(1): 25-7.
  2. McCashland T1, Brand R, Lyden E, de Garmo P. The time and financial impact of training fellows in endoscopy. CORI Research Project. Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000; 95(11): 3129-32.
  3. Bini EJ, Firoozi B, Choung RJ, Ali EM, Osman M, Weinshel EH. Systematic evaluation of complications related to endoscopy in a training setting: A prospective 30-day outcomes study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003; 57(1):8-16.
  4. Leung JW, Lee JG, Rojany M, Wilson R, Leung FW. Development of a novel ERCP mechanical simulator. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007; 65(7):1056-62.
  5. Ferlitsch A, Glauninger P, Gupper A, Schillinger M, Haefner M, Gangl A, et al. Evaluation of a virtual endoscopy simulator for training in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Endoscopy. 2002; 34(9): 698-702.
  6. Moorthy K, Munz Y, Jiwanji M, Bann S, Chang A, Darzi A. Validity and reliability of a virtual reality upper gastrointestinal simulator and cross validation using structured assessment of individual performance with video playback. Surg Endosc. 2004;18(2): 328-33.
  7. Di Giulio E, Fregonese D, Casetti T, Cestari R, Chilovi F, D'Ambra G, et al. Training with a computer-based simulator achieves basic manual skills for upper endoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004; 60(2):196-200.
  8. Hochberger J, Matthes K, Maiss J, Koebnick C, Hahn EG, Cohen J. Training with the compactEASIE biologic endoscopy simulator significantly improves hemostatic technical skill of gastroenterology fellows: a randomized controlled comparison with clinical endoscopy training alone. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005; 61(2):204-15.
  9. Haycock AV, Youd P, Bassett P, Saunders BP, Tekkis P, Thomas-Gibson S. Simulator training improves practical skills in therapeutic GI endoscopy: results from a randomized, blinded, controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 70(5):835-45.
  10. Maiss J, Prat F, Wiesnet J, Proeschel A, Matthes K, Peters A, et al. The complementary Erlangen Active Simulator for Interventional Endoscopy training is superior to solely clinical education in endoscopic hemostasis - the French training project: a prospective trial. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006; 18(11):1217-25.
  11. May A, Nachbar L, Schneider M, Neumann M, Ell C. Push-and-pull enteroscopy using the double-balloon technique: method of assessing depth of insertion and training of the enteroscopy technique using the Erlangen Endo-Trainer. Endoscopy. 2005; 37(1):66-70.
  12. Bittner JG, Mellinger JD, Imam T, Schade RR, Macfadyen BV Jr. Face and construct validity of a computer-based virtual reality simulator for ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 71(2):357-64.
  13. Desilets DJ, Banerjee S, Barth BA, Kaul V, Kethu SR, Pedrosa MC, et al. Endoscopic simulators. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011; 73(5):861-7.
  14. Walsh CM1, Sherlock ME, Ling SC, Carnahan H. Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;6: CD008237.
  15. Roff S. The Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM) a generic instrument for measuring students' perceptions of undergraduate health professions curricula. Med Teach. 2005; 27: 322-5.