Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2014 Dec 14;20(46):17507-15.
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i46.17507.

Endoscopic non-technical skills team training: the next step in quality assurance of endoscopy training

Manmeet Matharoo  1 , Adam Haycock  1 , Nick Sevdalis  1 , Siwan Thomas-Gibson  1
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Endoscopic non-technical skills team training: the next step in quality assurance of endoscopy training

Manmeet Matharoo et al. World J Gastroenterol. .

Abstract

Aim: To investigate whether novel, non-technical skills training for Bowel Cancer Screening (BCS) endoscopy teams enhanced patient safety knowledge and attitudes.

Methods: A novel endoscopy team training intervention for BCS teams was developed and evaluated as a pre-post intervention study. Four multi-disciplinary BCS teams constituting BCS endoscopist(s), specialist screening practitioners, endoscopy nurses and administrative staff (A) from English BCS training centres participated. No patients were involved in this study. Expert multidisciplinary faculty delivered a single day's training utilising real clinical examples. Pre and post-course evaluation comprised participants' patient safety awareness, attitudes, and knowledge. Global course evaluations were also collected.

Results: Twenty-three participants attended and their patient safety knowledge improved significantly from 43%-55% (P ≤ 0.001) following the training intervention. 12/41 (29%) of the safety attitudes items significantly improved in the areas of perceived patient safety knowledge and awareness. The remaining safety attitude items: perceived influence on patient safety, attitudes towards error management, error management actions and personal views following an error were unchanged following training. Both qualitative and quantitative global course evaluations were positive: 21/23 (91%) participants strongly agreed/agreed that they were satisfied with the course. Qualitative evaluation included mandating such training for endoscopy teams outside BCS and incorporating team training within wider endoscopy training. Limitations of the study include no measure of increased patient safety in clinical practice following training.

Conclusion: A novel comprehensive training package addressing patient safety, non-technical skills and adverse event analysis was successful in improving multi-disciplinary teams' knowledge and safety attitudes.

Keywords: Adverse events; Bowel cancer screening; Endoscopy Training; Patient safety; Teamwork.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Bowles CJ, Leicester R, Romaya C, Swarbrick E, Williams CB, Epstein O. A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow? Gut. 2004;53:277–283. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vincent C, Neale G, Woloshynowych M. Adverse events in British hospitals: preliminary retrospective record review. BMJ. 2001;322:517–519. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Reason JT. Human Error. USA: Cambridge University Press; 1990.
    1. Reason J. Human error: models and management. BMJ. 2000;320:768–770. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Leape LL, Brennan TA, Laird N, Lawthers AG, Localio AR, Barnes BA, Hebert L, Newhouse JP, Weiler PC, Hiatt H. The nature of adverse events in hospitalized patients. Results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study II. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:377–384. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms