JAG consensus statements for training and certification in colonoscopy.

Introduction: In the UK, endoscopy certification is awarded when trainees attain minimum competency standards for independent practice. A national evidence-based review was undertaken to update and develop standards and recommendations for colonoscopy training and certification. Methods: Under the oversight of the Joint Advisory Group (JAG), a modified Delphi process was conducted between 2019 and 2020 with multisociety expert representation. Following literature review and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations appraisal, recommendation statements on colonoscopy training and certification were formulated and subjected to anonymous voting to obtain consensus. Accepted statements were peer reviewed by JAG and relevant stakeholders for incorporation into the updated colonoscopy certification pathway. Results: In total, 45 recommendation statements were generated under the domains of: definition of competence (13), acquisition of competence (20), assessment of competence (8) and postcertification support (4). The consensus process led to revised criteria for colonoscopy certification, comprising: (1) achieving key performance indicators defined within British Society of Gastroenterology standards (ie, unassisted caecal intubation rate >90%, rectal retroversion >90%, polyp detection rate >15%+, polyp retrieval rate >90%, patient comfort <10% with moderate-severe discomfort); (2) minimum procedure count 280+; (3) performing 15+ procedures over the preceding 3 months; (4) attendance of the JAG Basic Skills in Colonoscopy course; (5) terminal ileal intubation rates of 60%+ in inflammatory bowel disease; (6) satisfying requirements for formative direct observation of procedure skills (DOPS) and direct observation of polypectomy skills (Size, Morphology, Site, Access (SMSA) level 2); (7) evidence of reflective practice as documented on the JAG Endoscopy Training System reflection tool; (8) successful performance in summative DOPS. Conclusion: The UK standards for training and certification in colonoscopy have been updated, culminating in a single-stage certification process with emphasis on polypectomy competency (SMSA Level 2+). These standards are intended to support training, improve standards of colonoscopy and polypectomy, and provide support to the newly independent practitioner.

JAG consensus statements for training and certification in flexible sigmoidoscopy.

Introduction: Joint Advisory Group (JAG) certification in endoscopy is awarded when trainees attain minimum competency standards for independent practice. A national evidence-based review was undertaken to update standards for training and certification in flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS). Methods: A modified Delphi process was conducted between 2019 and 2020 with multisociety representation from experts and trainees. Following literature review and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations appraisal, recommendation statements on FS training and certification were formulated and subjected to anonymous voting to obtain consensus. Accepted statements were peer-reviewed by national stakeholders for incorporation into the JAG FS certification pathway. Results: In total, 41 recommendation statements were generated under the domains of: definition of competence (13), acquisition of competence (17), assessment of competence (7) and postcertification support (4). The consensus process led to revised criteria for colonoscopy certification, comprising: (A) achieving key performance indicators defined within British Society of Gastroenterology standards (ie, rectal retroversion >90%, polyp retrieval rate >90%, patient comfort <10% with moderate-severe discomfort); (B) minimum procedure count ≥175; (C) performing 15+ procedures over the preceding 3 months; (D) attendance of the JAG Basic Skills in Lower gastrointestinal Endoscopy course; (E) satisfying requirements for formative direct observation of procedural skill (DOPS) and direct observation of polypectomy skill (SMSA level 1); (F) evidence of reflective practice as documented on the JAG Endoscopy Training System reflection tool and (G) successful performance in summative DOPS. Conclusion: The UK standards for training and certification in FS have been updated to support training, uphold standards in FS and polypectomy, and provide support to the newly independent practitioner.

Certification of UK gastrointestinal endoscopists and variations between trainee specialties: results from the JETS e-portfolio.

Introduction In the UK, endoscopy certification is administered by the Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG). Since 2011, certification for upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy has been awarded via a national (JETS) e-portfolio to the main training specialties of: gastroenterology, gastrointestinal surgeons (GS) and non-medical endoscopists (NME). Trends in endoscopy certification and differences between trainee specialties were analyzed. Methods This prospective UK-wide observational study identified trainees awarded gastroscopy, sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy (provisional and full) certification between June 2011 - 2017. Trends in certification, procedures and time-to-certification, and key performance indicators (KPIs) in the 3-month pre- and post-certification period were compared between the three main training specialties. Results Three thousand one hundred fifty-seven endoscopy-related certifications were awarded to 1928 trainees from gastroenterology (52.3 %), GS (28.4 %) and NME (16.5 â€Š%) specialties. During the study period, certification numbers increased for all modalities and specialties, particularly NME trainees. For gastroscopy and colonoscopy, procedures-to-certification were lowest for GS ( P  < 0.001), whereas time-to-certification was consistently shortest in NMEs ( P  < 0.001). A post-certification reduction in mean cecal intubation rate (95.2 % to 93.8 %, P  < 0.001) was observed in colonoscopy, and D2 intubation (97.6 % to 96.2 %, P  < 0.001) and J-maneuver (97.3 % to 95.8 %, P  < 0.001) in gastroscopy. Overall, average pre- and post-certification KPIs still exceeded national minimum standards. There was an increase in PDR for NMEs after provisional colonoscopy certification but a decrease in PDR for GS trainees after sigmoidoscopy and full colonoscopy certification. Conclusion Despite variations among trainee specialties, average pre- and post-certification KPIs for certified trainees met national standards, suggesting that JAG certification is a transparent benchmark which adequately safeguards competency in endoscopy training.

A retrospective study evaluating the use of Permacol™ surgical implant in incisional and ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: The outcome of incisional and ventral hernia repair depends on surgical technique, patient, and material. Permacol™ surgical implant (crosslinked porcine collagen) has been used for over a decade; however, there are few data on outcomes. This study is the largest retrospective multinational study to date to evaluate outcomes with Permacol™ surgical implant in the repair of incisional and ventral hernias. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively on 343 patients treated for 213 incisional and 130 ventral hernias. Data evaluated included patient demographics, wound classification, surgical technique, morbidity, and recurrence rates. RESULTS: Median follow-up time was 649 days (max: 2857), median age 57 years (range 23-91), and BMI 32 kg/m(2) (range 17.6-77.8). Two or more comorbidities were present in 70% of patients. Open surgery was performed in 220 (64%) patients. Permacol™ surgical implant was used as an underlay (250), sublay (39), onlay (37), or inlay (17). Surgical techniques included component separation (89; 25.9%), modified Stoppa technique (197; 57.4%), and Rives-Stoppa (17; 5.0%). CDC Surgical Wound Classification was Class I (190), Class II (103), Class III (28), and Class IV (22). Complications were seen in 40.5% (139) of the patients, with seroma (19%) and wound infection (15%) as the most common. Mesh removal occurred in 1 (0.3%) patient. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that the probabilities for hernia recurrence at one, two, and three years were 5.8%, 16.6%, and 31.0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Permacol™ surgical implant was shown to be safe with relatively low rates of hernia recurrence. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01214252 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Sacro-iliac osteomyelitis in a 13 year old boy following perforated appendicitis.

Appendicitis is a common cause of acute abdominal pain in children and is treated by an open or laparoscopic appendicectomy. Well documented post-operative complications include wound infection, intra-abdominal collection, and adhesional bowel obstruction. We present the rare case of right sacro-iliitis and iliac bone osteomyelitis in a 13 year old boy following an open appendicectomy for a perforated appendicitis.

Enhanced recovery in major colorectal surgery: safety and efficacy in an unselected surgical population at a UK district general hospital.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery Programmes (ERPs) have been shown to benefit recovery following major surgery in selected centres and patient groups, but their wider applicability requires continued evaluation. The aims of this study were to assess the outcomes of the first 400 consecutive, non-selected patients, undergoing major elective colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery programme at a UK District General hospital and to examine the effects of patient risk factors and operative approach on outcomes. METHODS: Since September 2005 all patients undergoing major elective colon and rectal surgery at our hospital have been treated within an ERP and their data recorded prospectively on a database. Safety and efficacy outcomes for the first 400 patients were compared using SPSS v14.0 with both a retrospective, pre-ERP group; and according to patient risk factors and operative approaches. RESULTS: Median length of stays (LOS) reduced from 9 days (IQR 7-11) to 6 days (IQR 5-10) after introduction of the ERP (p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences in LOS were observed between elderly (≥80 years) and younger patients or between different BMI groups. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade 3 patients demonstrated significantly longer median LOS than those with ASA grades 1 and 2. Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery had median LOS of 6 days (IQR 4-8) compared to 7 days (IQR 5-10) for open procedures (p < 0.001). No differences in morbidity or mortality were observed between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Unselected application of an ERP in our unit has been associated with reductions in post-operative LOS. The ERP was safe and effective when applied to all our study patients independent of age and BMI. Despite LOS being longer in ASA grade 3 patients, application of the ERP to this higher risk group was not associated with significantly increased morbidity or mortality. Laparoscopic surgery resulted in additional modest reductions in LOS compared to open surgery within the ERP.