No abstract

No abstract

Background Polypectomy is an essential endoscopic skill. Training in polypectomy has been identified as a major deficiency for endoscopists worldwide as polypectomy occurs ad hoc during a colonoscopy when a polyp is detected, and a lack of standardized curricula. Augmented reality (AR), which superimposes computer-generated images on a user’s view of the world, can address these gaps by standardizing encounters with polyps while completing simulated procedures and enabling polypectomy-specific teaching. Aims Evaluate the impact of a simulation-based augmented reality curriculum on polypectomy performance among novice endoscopists. Methods This study includes two cohorts of participants from 2019 to 2020. In 2019, participants were randomized into either: (1) a control curriculum, involving 6 hours of simulation-based training (SBT) supplemented by expert feedback, interlaced with 4 hours of small group teaching on the theory of colonoscopy; or (2) the augmented reality curriculum (ARC), in involving the same curriculum with integrated AR, wherein participants engaged with an AR-enhanced video demonstrating relevant therapeutic and pathologic details during polypectomy. The SBT for all participants involved a progressive curriculum starting on a bench-top model and then moving to the EndoVR® virtual reality simulator. The primary outcome was polypectomy-specific performance using the Direct Observation of Polypectomy Skills (DOPyS) tool during a simulated polypectomy after training, with a maximum score of 100. Results Demographic characteristics are summarized in Table. In 2019, 21 novice endoscopists were enrolled. Immediately after training, the mean DOPyS score among ARC group participants was 76.2 (SD=17.9) compared to 71.8 (SD=13.2) among control group participants (Figure). In this interim analysis, there was no significant difference between groups. Data analysis will be completed after 2020 participants complete the study. Conclusions Interim results show a trend towards improved polypectomy performance with no significant difference. The results of this study have the potential to impact polypectomy education among novices. Simulation-based AR interventions may allow learners to progress towards achieving competency in polypectomy in a risk-free environment prior to first patient contact. Funding Agencies None

Background Propensity score matching (PSM), a statistical technique that estimates a treatment effect by accounting for predictor covariates, has been used to evaluate biologics for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Financial conflicts of interest are prevalent in the marketing of biologic medications. It is unclear whether this burden of conflicts is present among authors of PSM studies comparing IBD biologics and biosimilars. Objective This study was aimed to determine the prevalence of financial conflicts of interest among authors of PSM studies evaluating IBD biologics and biosimilars. Methods We conducted a systematic search for PSM studies comparing biologics and biosimilars in IBD treatment. We identified 21 eligible studies. Two independent authors extracted self-declared conflicts from the disclosures section. Each participating author was searched on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments to identify payment amounts and undisclosed conflicts. Primary outcome was the prevalence of author conflicts. Secondary analyses assessed for an association between conflict prevalence and reporting of positive outcomes. Results Among 283 authors, conflicts were present among 41.0% (116 of 283). Twenty-three per cent (27 of 116) of author conflicts involved undisclosed payments. Studies with positive outcomes were significantly more likely to include conflicted authors than neutral studies (relative risk = 2.34, 95% confidence interval: 1.71 to 3.21, P < 0.001). Conclusions Overall, we found a high burden of undisclosed conflicts among authors of PSM studies comparing IBD biologics and biosimilars. Given the importance of PSM studies as a means for biologic comparison and the potential for undue industry influence from these payments, authors should ensure greater transparency with reporting of industry relationships.