C0293 - It Matters! Sex Differences Impact Ergonomic, Endoscopic Training for Gastroenterology Fellows

Fathima K. Suhail, MD¹, Yuying Luo, MD², Rashmi Advani, MD³, Kirsti A. Campbell, MD⁴, Katie A. Dunleavy, MB, BCh, BAO⁵, Anam Rizvi, MD⁶, Loren Rabinowitz, MD^4
1SUNY Upstate Medlcal University, Syracuse, NY; ²Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; ³Renaissance School of Medicine at Stony Brook University, Bayside, NY; ⁴Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA; ⁵Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; ⁶North Shore University Hospital & Long Island Jewish Medical Center (NS/LIJ), Queens, NY

Introduction: Repetitive movements, poor posture, and insufficient education on endoscopic ergonomics can lead to endoscopic related injuries (ERI). More women are entering gastroenterology (GI), and may encounter increased ergonomic challenges due to smaller average hand size and stature. This study assesses whether sex and gender-related characteristics impact ERI, ergonomic training, and knowledge among current GI fellows.

Methods: A 56-item anonymous survey was sent to general and advanced GI fellows via email between May and June 2022 to 73 academic centers across the United States. Basic demographic information was obtained including: age, sex, gender, training level, height, glove size, types of endoscopy teachers, and whether ERI was sustained. Questions related to endoscopy suite environment, ergonomic instruction, techniques, equipment availability/use and basic ergonomic knowledge were also included. Univariate and multivariate analyses were utilized in order to compare responses of male and female GI fellows.

Results: The questionnaire was emailed to 667 participants; 203 surveys were initiated with response rate of 31%; 200 surveys were completed and included in analyses. Of the 200 respondents, 99 (49.5%) reported female sex at birth and 101 (50.5%) reported male sex at birth. Female fellows were noted to have average smaller hand size and stature (Figure 1). More female fellows reported that equipment was not ergonomically optimized for their use (47.5% vs 28.7%, p = .006) (Table 1). Additionally, more females reported that their female teachers had trained them with consideration of physical size (22.4% v 9%, p = .068), and voiced increased desire for access to dial extenders (55.6% vs 20.2%, p = .001). There was a higher incidence of neck and shoulder pain following endoscopy sessions among female fellows (55.6% vs 28.7%, p=.001). Despite no sex differences, overall poor ergonomic understanding was noted, with an average score of 60% on 5-point knowledge-based test.

Discussion: Sex differences exist in ergonomic and endoscopic training of current GI fellows. This study highlights the urgent need for formal ergonomic training with consideration sex of the trainee and physical stature, in order to enhance safety, comfort, efficiency, and equity in training and practice of endoscopy.




Disclosures:


Fathima K. Suhail, MD¹, Yuying Luo, MD², Rashmi Advani, MD³, Kirsti A. Campbell, MD⁴, Katie A. Dunleavy, MB, BCh, BAO⁵, Anam Rizvi, MD⁶, Loren Rabinowitz, MD⁴. C0293 - It Matters! Sex Differences Impact Ergonomic, Endoscopic Training for Gastroenterology Fellows, ACG 2022 Annual Scientific Meeting Abstracts. Charlotte, NC: American College of Gastroenterology.