Comparing In Vivo versus Simulation Training for Transnasal Endoscopy Skills

Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluations of swallowing (FEES) is as important of a swallowing evaluation as the videoflouroscopic swallow study, but far fewer speech-language pathologists are competent in its use (Ambika, Datta, Manjula, Warawantkar, & Thomas, 2019; Brady & Donzelli, 2013; Pisegna & Langmore, 2016). One hurdle in FEES training is the necessity of practicing transnasal endoscopy on volunteers. The primary aim of this study was to compare the learning effectiveness of practicing transnasal endoscopy via simulation with practice in vivo for a student’s first passes of the endoscope. The end goal of this study was to determine the most cost-effective and feasible means of teaching transnasal endoscopy to graduate clinicians. Twenty-one graduate students practiced transnasal endoscopy in one of three conditions: in vivo, high-fidelity lifelike simulation, low-fidelity non-lifelike simulation. The learning outcomes assessed were speed of endoscopy, student confidence, and simulated patients’ comfort and perception of student skill. There were no significant differences between conditions found for any of these measures. Students in all conditions became more confident after practicing endoscopy, and that confidence was predictive of procedure time. The results of this study indicate that practice with simulation may be an important first step in teaching endoscopy.