Who will excel in advanced endoscopy? A study assessing the criteria and perceptions of experts with regard to selection of ERCP and EUS trainees

Abstract

Background and study aims Training program directors (TPDs) and experts play a crucial role in selecting ERCP/EUS trainees and determining the workforce in endoscopy. Additionally, prospective trainees should know what TPDs/experts expect from them. Nonetheless, the criteria and perceptions used in this selection have not been clarified. The aim of this study was to identify TPD/expert values/beliefs regarding personal attributes needed for selecting trainees that can excel and those which may lead to disqualification; compare perspectives between TPDs/experts and trainees regarding the selection process and critical trainee characteristics; and investigate the general approach and satisfaction regarding current application process for ERCP/EUS training.

Methods We conducted a web-based survey to collect general opinion and data regarding the application process and trainee selection and disqualification from training. European TPDs/experts and trainees were invited to participate.

Results Thirty-six TPDs/experts and 25 trainees from 18 countries responded. The application process is mainly driven by individual request (86.1 %). Almost half of TPDs/experts felt only moderately (38.9 %) to slightly (8.3 %) satisfied with the current application process. TPDs/experts value a diversity of trainee characteristics, but mainly traits such as “honesty,” “being a team player,” and “self-awareness” (72.2 % each). Technical skills ranked seventh as considered “extremely important.” “Disregard for patient welfare” and “lack of work ethic” were the most common reasons for disqualification. TPDs/experts and trainees agreed in most questions.

Conclusions This survey outlines trainee selection criteria for ERCP/EUS training. Non-technical skills are the most valued by TPDs/experts. While knowledge and technical expertise are clearly important, understanding that professional attitudes are highly regarded may help direct the application process more effectively.

Publication History

Received: 24 June 2022

Accepted after revision: 17 November 2022

Article published online:
23 March 2023

• References

• 1 Johnson G, Webster G, Boškoski I. et al. Curriculum for ERCP and endoscopic ultrasound training in Europe: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement. Endoscopy 2021; 53: 1071-1087
• 2 Kochman ML. Third-tier fellowship training: advantages and program selection. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 427-428
• 3 Keswani RN, Qumseya BJ, O’Dwyer LC. et al. Association between endoscopist and center endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography volume with procedure success and adverse outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 15: 1866-1875.e3
• 4 Gibson KS, Muffly TM, Penick E. et al. Factors used by program directors to select obstetrics and gynecology fellows. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 119: 119-124
• 5 Grabowski G, Walker JW. Orthopaedic Fellowship selection criteria: a survey of fellowship directors. J Bone Joint Surgery 2013; 95: e154
• 6 Benzon HA, De Oliveira GS, Jagannathan N. et al. Selection of subspecialty fellows in anesthesia for pediatric anesthesia: a national survey of program directors in the United States. Paediatr Anaesth 2015; 25: 487-491
• 7 Shantha JG, Shulman B, Gonzalez M. et al. American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Fellowship Survey: Fellows Selection Criteria for Training Programs. Ophthal Plastic Reconstruct Surgery 2013; 29: 428-430
• 8 Nies MS, Bollinger AJ, Cassidy C. et al. Factors used by program directors to select hand surgery fellows. J Hand Surgery 2014; 39: 2285-2288.e5
• 9 Dijkhuizen K, Bustraan J, van den Bogaard MED. et al. Values and beliefs on trainee selection: What counts in the eye of the selector? A qualitative study exploring the program director’s perspective. Medical Teacher 2020; 42: 1179-1186
• 10 Anderson J, Lockett M. Training in therapeutic endoscopy: meeting present and future challenges. Frontline Gastroenterol 2019; 10: 135-140
• 11 Selber JC, Tong W, Koshy J. et al. Correlation between trainee candidate selection criteria and subsequent performance. J American Coll Surgeons 2014; 219: 951-957
• 12 Lieberman D. How to select a mentor as a trainee and junior faculty. Gastroenterology 2016; 151: 17-19
• 13 Jovanovic I, Mönkemüller K. Quality in endoscopy training—the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography case. Ann Transl Med 2018; 6: 264-264
• 14 Flin R, Maran N. Identifying and training non-technical skills for teams in acute medicine. Qual Saf Health Care 2004; 13: i80-84
• 15 Helmreich RL, Merritt AC, Wilhelm JA. The evolution of Crew Resource Management training in commercial aviation. Int J Aviat Psychol 1999; 9: 19-32
• 16 Flin R, Patey R, Glavin R. et al. Anaesthetists’ non-technical skills. Br J Anaesth 2010; 105: 38-44
• 17 McCulloch P, Mishra A, Handa A. et al. The effects of aviation-style non-technical skills training on technical performance and outcome in the operating theatre. Qual Saf Health Care 2009; 18: 109-115
• 18 Hitchins CR, Metzner M, Edworthy J. et al. Non-technical skills and gastrointestinal endoscopy: a review of the literature. Frontline Gastroenterol 2018; 9: 129-134
• 19 Ravindran S, Thomas-Gibson S, Murray S. et al. Improving safety and reducing error in endoscopy: simulation training in human factors. Frontline Gastroenterol 2019; 10: 160-166
• 20 Siau K, Dunckley P, Feeney M. et al. ERCP assessment tool: evidence of validity and competency development during training. Endoscopy 2019; 51: 1017-1026
• 21 Wood M. Maintaining and fostering the future success of academic anesthesia: recruiting and training the next generation of academic anesthesiologists. Anesth Analg 2013; 116: 1-3