Assessing colonoscopic inspection skill using a virtual withdrawal simulation: a preliminary validation of performance metrics.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of colonoscopy for diagnosing and preventing colon cancer is largely dependent on the ability of endoscopists to fully inspect the colonic mucosa, which they achieve primarily through skilled manipulation of the colonoscope during withdrawal. Performance assessment during live procedures is problematic. However, a virtual withdrawal simulation can help identify and parameterise actions linked to successful inspection, and offer standardised assessments for trainees. METHODS: Eleven experienced endoscopists and 18 endoscopy novices (medical students) completed a mucosal inspection task during three simulated colonoscopic withdrawals. The two groups were compared on 10 performance metrics to preliminarily assess the validity of these measures to describe inspection quality. Four metrics were related to aspects of polyp detection: percentage of polyp markers found; number of polyp markers found per minute; percentage of the mucosal surface illuminated by the colonoscope (≥0.5 s); and percentage of polyp markers illuminated (≥2.5 s) but not identified. A further six metrics described the movement of the colonoscope: withdrawal time; linear distance travelled by the colonoscope tip; total distance travelled by the colonoscope tip; and distance travelled by the colonoscope tip due to movement of the up/down angulation control, movement of the left/right angulation control, and axial shaft rotation. RESULTS: Statistically significant experienced-novice differences were found for 8 of the 10 performance metrics (p's < .005). Compared with novices, experienced endoscopists inspected more of the mucosa and detected more polyp markers, at a faster rate. Despite completing the withdrawals more quickly than the novices, the experienced endoscopists also moved the colonoscope more in terms of linear distance travelled and overall tip movement, with greater use of both the up/down angulation control and axial shaft rotation. However, the groups did not differ in the number of polyp markers visible on the monitor but not identified, or movement of the left/right angulation control. All metrics that yielded significant group differences had adequate to excellent internal consistency reliability (α = .79 to .90). CONCLUSIONS: These systematic differences confirm the potential of the simulated withdrawal task for evaluating inspection skills and strategies. It may be useful for training, and assessment of trainee competence.

A competency framework for colonoscopy training derived from cognitive task analysis techniques and expert review.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is a difficult cognitive-perceptual-motor task. Designing an appropriate instructional program for such a task requires an understanding of the knowledge, skills and attitudes underpinning the competency required to perform the task. Cognitive task analysis techniques provide an empirical means of deriving this information. METHODS: Video recording and a think-aloud protocol were conducted while 20 experienced endoscopists performed colonoscopy procedures. "Cued-recall" interviews were also carried out post-procedure with nine of the endoscopists. Analysis of the resulting transcripts employed the constant comparative coding method within a grounded theory framework. The resulting draft competency framework was modified after review during semi-structured interviews conducted with six expert endoscopists. RESULTS: The proposed colonoscopy competency framework consists of twenty-seven skill, knowledge and attitude components, grouped into six categories (clinical knowledge; colonoscope handling; situation awareness; heuristics and strategies; clinical reasoning; and intra- and inter-personal). CONCLUSIONS: The colonoscopy competency framework provides a principled basis for the design of a training program, and for the design of formative assessment to gauge progress towards attaining the knowledge, skills and attitudes underpinning the achievement of colonoscopy competence.

Control order and visuomotor strategy development for joystick-steered underground shuttle cars.

OBJECTIVE: In this simulator-based study, we aimed to quantify performance differences between joystick steering systems using first-order and second-order control, which are used in underground coal mining shuttle cars. In addition, we conducted an exploratory analysis of how users of the more difficult, second-order system changed their behavior over time. BACKGROUND: Evidence from the visuomotor control literature suggests that higher-order control devices are not intuitive, which could pose a significant risk to underground mine personnel, equipment, and infrastructure. METHOD: Thirty-six naive participants were randomly assigned to first- and second-order conditions and completed three experimental trials comprising sequences of 90 degrees turns in a virtual underground mine environment, with velocity held constant at 9 km/h(-1). Performance measures were lateral deviation, steering angle variability, high-frequency steering content, joystick activity, and cumulative time in collision with the virtual mine wall. RESULTS: The second-order control group exhibited significantly poorer performance for all outcome measures. In addition, a series of correlation analyses revealed that changes in strategy were evident in the second-order group but not the first-order group. CONCLUSION: Results were consistent with previous literature indicating poorer performance with higher-order control devices and caution against the adoption of the second-order joystick system for underground shuttle cars. APPLICATION: Low-cost, portable simulation platforms may provide an effective basis for operator training and recruitment.

Effect of control order on steering a simulated underground coal shuttle car.

Most terrestrial vehicles are steered via a first-order control for vehicle heading, such as a conventional steering wheel. A joystick which provides second-order control of vehicle heading is used to steer some underground coal shuttle cars. A desktop virtual simulation of the situation was employed to compare the steering accuracy of 24 novice participants randomly assigned to either first-order or second-order joystick steering conditions. The average steering accuracy of participants assigned to the first-order joystick condition was superior, however there was considerable individual variability and some participants assigned to the second-order steering condition were able to perform the task equally and successfully. Desktop virtual simulation may be a useful component of training and competency assessment for operators of these vehicles.

Directional control-response compatibility of joystick steered shuttle cars.

Shuttle cars are an unusual class of vehicle operated in underground coal mines, sometimes in close proximity to pedestrians and steering errors may have very serious consequences. A directional control-response incompatibility has previously been described in shuttle cars which are controlled using a steering wheel oriented perpendicular to the direction of travel. Some other shuttle car operators are seated perpendicular to the direction of travel and steer the car via a seat mounted joystick. A virtual simulation was utilised to determine whether the steering arrangement in these vehicles maintains directional control-response compatibility. Twenty-four participants were randomly assigned to either a condition corresponding to this design (consistent direction), or a condition in which the directional steering response was reversed while driving in-bye (visual field compatible). Significantly less accurate steering performance was exhibited by the consistent direction group during the in-bye trials only. Shuttle cars which provide the joystick steering mechanism described here require operators to accommodate alternating compatible and incompatible directional control-response relationships with each change of car direction. PRACTITIONER SUMMARY: A virtual simulation of an underground coal shuttle car demonstrates that the design incorporates a directional control-response incompatibility when driving the vehicle in one direction. This design increases the probability of operator error, with potential adverse safety and productivity consequences.

Reducing control selection errors associated with underground bolting equipment.

Selecting the incorrect control during the operation of underground bolting and drilling equipment causes serious injuries. Shape coding and the layout of dual control banks are two aspects of control design which require further examination. The aims of this research were: (i) to determine whether arbitrary shape coding was effective in reducing selection error rates in a virtual analogy of roof-bolting; and (ii) to determine whether any advantages exist for mirror or place layouts for dual control situations in this situation. Two experiments were conducted to address these questions. No benefits of arbitrary shape coding were evident while control location remained constant. When control location was altered, shape coding did provide a significant reduction in selection error rate. No differences between mirror or place arrangements were detected and this question remains open.

Performance consequences of alternating directional control-response compatibility: evidence from a coal mine shuttle car simulator.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate error and reaction time consequences of alternating compatible and incompatible steering arrangements during a simulated obstacle avoidance task. BACKGROUND: Underground coal mine shuttle cars provide an example of a vehicle in which operators are required to alternate between compatible and incompatible steering configurations. METHODS: This experiment examines the performance of 48 novice participants in a virtual analogy of an underground coal mine shuttle car. Participants were randomly assigned to a compatible condition, an incompatible condition, an alternating condition in which compatibility alternated within and between hands, or an alternating condition in which compatibility alternated between hands. RESULTS: Participants made fewer steering direction errors and made correct steering responses more quickly in the compatible condition. Error rate decreased over time in the incompatible condition. A compatibility effect for both errors and reaction time was also found when the control-response relationship alternated; however, performance improvements over time were not consistent. Isolating compatibility to a hand resulted in reduced error rate and faster reaction time than when compatibility alternated within and between hands. CONCLUSION: The consequences of alternating control-response relationships are higher error rates and slower responses, at least in the early stages of learning. APPLICATION: This research highlights the importance of ensuring consistently compatible human-machine directional control-response relationships.