Simulator-based training method in gastrointestinal endoscopy training and currently available simulators.

The apprenticeship-based training method (ABTM) is highly effective for gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic training. However, the conventional ABTM has significant issues. Although many supplementary training methods (TMs) have been developed and utilized, they cannot entirely replace the ABTM, which remains the major TM strategy. Currently, new TM construction is crucial and necessary due to financial constraints, difficulty of obtaining sufficient training time due to patient safety-related regulations, and catastrophic damage caused by disasters such as the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The simulator-based TM (SBTM) is widely accepted as an alternative to the ABTM, owing to the SBTM's advantages. Since the 1960s, many GI endoscopy training simulators have been developed and numerous studies have been published on their effectiveness. While previous studies have focused on the simulator's validity, this review focused on the accessibility of simulators that were introduced by the end of 2021. Although the current SBTM is effective in GI endoscopic education, extensive improvements are needed to replace the ABTM. Incorporating simulator-incorporated TMs into an improved ABTM is an attempt to overcome the incompleteness of the current SBTM. Until a new simulator is developed to replace the ABTM, it is desirable to operate a simulator-integrated and well-coordinated TM that is suitable for each country and institution.

Clinical Course of COVID-19 in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Korea: a KASID Multicenter Study.

In 2020, the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) began to spread worldwide and remains an ongoing medical challenge. This case series reports on the clinical features and characteristics of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and confirmed COVID-19 infection. From February 2020 to March 2021, nine patients with IBD had confirmed COVID-19 across four hospitals in Korea. The median age at COVID-19 diagnosis was 42 years. Six patients were male, and seven patients had ulcerative colitis (UC). No patients required oxygen therapy, intensive care unit hospitalizations, or died. The most common symptom was fever, and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms developed as diarrhea in five patients with UC. Oral steroids were used to combat UC aggravation in two patients. In this case series of nine IBD patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in Korea, the clinical presentation was predominately a mild respiratory tract infection. Most patients with UC developed new GI symptoms including diarrhea.

The Influence of Face Shields on the Quality of Colonoscopy in the Era of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background/Aims: The worldwide coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has led endoscopists to use personal protective equipment (PPE) for infection prevention. This study aimed to investigate whether wearing a face shield as PPE affects the quality of colonoscopy. Methods: We reviewed the medical records and colonoscopy findings of patients who underwent colonoscopies at Asan Medical Center, Korea from March 10 to May 31, 2020. The colonoscopies in this study were performed by five gastroenterology fellows and four expert endoscopists. We compared colonoscopy quality indicators, such as withdrawal time, adenoma detection rate (ADR), mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy (APC), polypectomy time, and polypectomy adverse events, both before and after face shields were added as PPE on April 13, 2020. Results: Of the 1,344 colonoscopies analyzed, 715 and 629 were performed before and after the introduction of face shields, respectively. The median withdrawal time was similar between the face shield and no-face shield groups (8.72 minutes vs 8.68 minutes, p=0.816), as was the ADR (41.5% vs 39.8%, p=0.605) and APC (0.72 vs 0.77, p=0.510). Polypectomy-associated quality indicators, such as polypectomy time and polypectomy adverse events were also not different between the groups. Quality indicators were not different between the face shield and no-face shield groups of gastroenterology fellows, or of expert endoscopists. Conclusions: Colonoscopy performance was not unfavorably affected by the use of a face shield. PPE, including face shields, can be recommended without a concern about colonoscopy quality deterioration.