Current Pediatric Endoscopy Training Situation in the Asia-Pacific Region: A Collaborative Survey by the Asian Pan-Pacific Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Endoscopy Scientific Subcommittee

• Published in: Pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology & nutrition Vol. 27; no. 4; pp. 258 - 265
• Main Authors: Nuthapong Ukarapol, Narumon Tanatip, Ajay Sharma, Maribel Vitug-Sales, Robert Nicholas Lopez, Rohan Malik, Ruey Terng Ng, Shuichiro Umetsu, Songpon Getsuwan, Tak Yau Stephen Lui, Yao-Jong Yang, Yeoun Joo Lee, Katsuhiro Arai, Kyung Mo Kim, APPSPGHAN Endoscopy Scientific Subcommittee
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: Korean
• Published: 2024
• Subjects: Pediatrics; Education; Asia; Endoscopy
• ISSN: 2234-8646; 2234-8840

Purpose: To date, there is no region-specific guideline for pediatric endoscopy training. This study aimed to illustrate the current status of pediatric endoscopy training in Asia-Pacific region and identify opportunities for improvement. Methods: A cross-sectional survey, using a standardized electronic questionnaire, was conducted among medical schools in the Asia-Pacific region in January 2024. Results: A total of 57 medical centers in 12 countries offering formal Pediatric Gastroenterology training programs participated in this regional survey. More than 75% of the centers had an average case load of <10 cases per week for both diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopies. Only 36% of the study programs employed competency-based outcomes for program development, whereas nearly half (48%) used volume-based curricula. Foreign body retrieval, polypectomy, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, and esophageal variceal hemostasis, that is, sclerotherapy or band ligation (endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy and endoscopic variceal ligation), comprised the top four priorities that the trainees should acquire in the autonomous stage (unconscious) of competence. Regarding the learning environment, only 31.5% provided formal hands-on workshops/simulation training. The direct observation of procedural skills was the most commonly used assessment method. The application of a quality assurance (QA) system in both educational and patient care (Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network) aspects was present in only 28% and 17% of the centers, respectively. Conclusion: Compared with Western academic societies, the limited availability of cases remains a major concern. To close this gap, simulation and adult endoscopy training are essential. The implementation of reliable and valid assessment tools and QA systems can lead to significant development in future programs.