Tag Archives: bronchoscopy

Introducing the new BronchAtlas

Better lung health is within reach with our tailored solutions. Visit bronchatlas.com to find out how to
enhance respiratory care effectively. http://bronchatlas.com

Our mission at Bronchoscopy International has always been and still is to provide practitioners and trainees around the world with free, easily accessible tools that will enhance their ability to care for their patients competently. Our slide decks have been used by teachers and learners for more than twenty years, and materials from The Essential Bronchoscopist series of training manuals are used in educational programs around the world, as well as by individual practitioners as study guides. Our Checklists and assessment tools have helped change the paradigm of procedure-related training, successfully complementing the traditional apprentice-style mode of professional development and facilitating competency-oriented training for new procedures. I am proud to say that our study guides were the first ever provided freely to bronchoscopists and interventional pulmonologists around the world, and our teaching videos, many created long before the video teaching boom, have had almost two million views.

With the new and improved BronchAtlas, our goal is to bring bronchoscopy-related learning to the bedside using an easily accessible and practical telephone-based learning instrument. This modality is a vital tool that requires minimal technology and works around varying levels of infrastructure. It is one more step in the direction of democratization of knowledge, an essential step toward greater professional development and improving patient outcomes.

With BronchAtlas (connect to www.bronchatlas.com), health care providers, students, as well as patients can easily access information pertaining to bronchoscopy in special situations. Each “topic” is covered by a series of bullet points organized into FOUR easily read components: addressing the problem at hand, providing the solution, listing a set of references, and providing links to an instructive YouTube-based video from our Bronchoscopy Academy YouTube channel. It takes less than three minutes to view each topic, making this tool ideal as a refresher or handy problem-solver.

We hope you will enjoy using BronchAtlas, and we encourage you to pass the link to the BronchAtlas website along to your friends and colleagues. More “modules” are coming, so please let us know which other topics you would like to see addressed. Also, if you would like to assist with authorship or as a video contributor, please contact us. We look forward to hearing from you!

From Novice to Expert: The Dreyfus Skill Model

The Dreyfus model of skill acquisition was proposed in 1980 and has since been used by educators to explain how learners progress from being novices to becoming experts, passing through stages of being an advanced beginner, competent, and proficient at their assigned task. The authors later added a sixth stage, that of master, to their sequential and somewhat linear progression scale.

The model is intuitively logical and appears to apply to most professional learning endeavors. It suggests that as learners progress, they move from strictly applying rules and guidelines to becoming aware of how their actions might affect and be affected by circumstances and their environment. This “intuitive perspective,” once acquired, is an important aspect of competence. With further work, training, and experience, learners develop what is referred to as “reflexive reorientation,” whereby learners are able to competently respond to changing or unexpected situations without necessarily resorting to reflective decision-making. For the most part, this defines the “expert” level of skill development.

The question is whether the Dreyfus model lends itself clearly to learning interventional pulmonology. Considering how the model stresses the importance of rules, guidelines, and intuitive experience-based decision-making, it helps educators design competency-oriented curricula and develop step-by-step knowledge and skills-related learning and testing materials. It underscores the importance of experiential knowledge and thus reinforces the complementarity of apprentice-style training with simulation-based learning.

The drawbacks, especially as regards bronchoscopy and interventional pulmonology, are based on the fact that one can reside simultaneously in different stages for different procedures, all while being perceived as an expert overall based on certification, place of practice, presumed experience, or academic titles. Furthermore, the boundaries between stages are blurred, and one may progress, regress, plateau, or skip stages depending on clinical context, the degree of technical difficulty of the procedure, or the complexity of the patient’s circumstances and medical environment. By no means, therefore, is there a linear progression universally applicable to all aspects of IP.

Considering these limitations, I wonder whether a limited certification process could be helpful for certain groups of procedures. Obviously, competency-oriented learning materials for each group would address technical, cognitive, affective, and experiential knowledge, complemented by a series of associated assessment tools, simulation-based exercises, and real-life training experiences that help determine competency and level of expertise.

The model also fails to consider individual learning differences, cultural variances, or the importance of having access to experts and masters for guidance and assistance. It ignores differences in experiential training, personality, and decision-making skills that might empower or endanger the effects of intuitive thinking and reflective reorientation, or reinforce personal biases that might hinder rather than promote professional and personal growth. I believe these elements become especially important for those aspiring to practice at the expert level.

Becoming a better bronchoscopist

Many interventional pulmonologists have a lifelong goal of becoming better bronchoscopists. Consistent improvement is a key element of competency-based learning, and this requires enhanced technical skills, greater acquisition of theoretical knowledge, keen clinical judgement and critical thinking, an appreciation for evidence-based practice, and an understanding of expected professionalism and ethical conduct.

Because bronchoscopy is a “procedure,” one might argue that technical mastery is the first and possibly most important requirement for all bronchoscopists. Certainly, it is what novices think about when they pick up a flexible bronchoscope for the first time. From this perspective, I believe the foundation for becoming a better bronchoscopist has four cornerstones.

Muscle memory is best achieved by deliberate and repeated practice. Just as musicians run scales and practice finger exercises for many hours, bronchoscopists can practice in models as well as in real-life settings to overcome awkwardness, indecision, and inefficiency. Navigating the bronchoscope through both normal and variant airways becomes more fluid as movements and manipulations become natural and instinctive. No longer struggling to get the scope where they want it, operators can focus on interpreting findings and decision-making rather than mechanics.

Economy of movement teaches how to avoid unnecessary manipulations. This improves efficiency, helps avoid operator fatigue and injury, and keeps the scope centered within the airway to avoid repetitive movements, mucosal trauma, and cough. This results in a faster procedure, reduces patient discomfort, and assures that every aspect of the intervention is done with precision and purpose. The difference between fumbling around in the airway and working dexterously and with intent is one of the first indicators of technical proficiency.

Pattern recognition is developed with experience. This means performing hundreds of procedures and viewing hundreds, if not more, photographs and videos of mucosal changes. With experience, bronchoscopists establish an internal catalogue of airway abnormalities and variations. They acquire an encyclopedia of normal airway appearances and a keen appreciation for what might be airway inflammation, edema, neoplasia, or the nuances of airway vascularity. Over time and with proper mentoring, as well as after considerable study and self-reflection, recognizing these findings becomes interpretive and insightful. Pattern recognition becomes part of one’s intuition as it is incorporated into the clinical context and combined with radiological findings, pathophysiology, and probabilistic reasoning.

Moral fortitude is where procedural technical skills and physician responsibility intersect. The bronchoscopist must learn how to respond to uncertainty, how to act and react decisively, resist temptations to overstep their expertise, and maintain composure in case of complications or unexpected patient and procedure-related difficulties. Moral fortitude helps define their professional character and plays an important part in developing a moral compass that bronchoscopists can follow to help ensure their patients’ safety, dignity, and trust.

What is ‘Bronchosophy’

Interventional pulmonologists live simultaneously and sequentially in many worlds. One moment, they may find themselves directly responsible for the life or death of a patient with advanced disease; in the next, they might be delivering bad news, making prognoses under uncertain conditions, wrestling with the uncertainties of a novel technology, initiating long-term strategies, or advocating for their approach in a multidisciplinary care meeting.

Many interventional pulmonologists are naturally curious and enthused to learn how to perform new procedures that require manual dexterity and analytical precision. But the profession demands more than technical skill to truly serve its patients. Equally important are a doctor’s abilities to communicate with clarity, courage, compassion, grace, and humility. Practicing medicine with such depth and professionalism is both a challenge and a virtue.

It is not surprising, therefore, that bronchoscopy, a fundamental component of interventional pulmonology, is more than just a procedure. It is a way of seeing not only literally into the airways, but also metaphorically into a patient’s life. It is the means by which interventional pulmonologists contribute to another human being’s life story, often at a critical time of their patient’s journey between birth and death.

More than forty years ago, one of the first bronchoscopies I performed prompted a difficult conversation with my patient about the effects of malignant central airway obstruction on their life and well-being. At that time, most oncologists and pulmonary specialists were still nihilistic about lung cancer treatments, and the value of palliative airway procedures was neither recognized nor accepted. My patient went on to receive chemotherapy and external beam radiation, sadly with little improvement in their symptoms and without a beneficial effect on their quality of life. During those weeks, I learned much from our bedside conversations, including humility. I realized that my ability to see into my patients’ airways granted me the privilege to hear their life stories. What remained was for me to determine the best ways I could help them.

The results of this experience might be described as bronchosophy (pronounced /ˈbrɒŋ. kəˌsɒf.i or /ˈbrən kasəfi/), which is a term a few of us have used over the years, but has not yet entered common language. Just as philosophy might represent the pursuit of wisdom, truth, and knowledge, bronchosophy represents the pursuit of wisdom in the practice of bronchology. It can be defined as ‘a reflective and principled approach to the art and science of airway examination and intervention, combining technical skill with ethical insight, clinical judgment, and humanistic care.’ In other words, bronchosophy is the cornerstone from which the art and science of bronchology and interventional pulmonology blend with our humanity and heartfelt endeavors to do what is in the best interests of our patients.

Ethics in Interventional Pulmonology

Ethics, from the Greek words ēthos and ēthike philosophia (moral philosophy), is traditionally defined as the study of morality. What ought I do in a particular situation? What are the limits of my responsibility? How do my actions and behaviors relate to the particular norms, expectations, rules, or codes of conduct established by my profession, peers, and society, and how might these affect my community?

The study of ethics also raises awareness and helps address other questions: Do my actions reflect a moral conscience at the center of my being or a system of thought dependent upon religious or societal models of expected behaviors? What are the emotional consequences if I must choose, in my desire to do what is right, from among potentially opposing ethical concepts, and might I rely on both subjective and objective arguments to justify my decisions?

The Greek philosopher, Aristotle (384-322 BCE), was himself the son of a physician. He begins his treatise, Nichomachean Ethics, by writing, “Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good…will not the knowledge of it, then, have a great influence on life?”^[i] Since its origins, the ‘art and science’ of bronchology and interventional pulmonology has grown in leaps and bounds. Focus has been on disease states, procedural techniques, training curricula, and how to best apply new technologies. The study of IP-related medical ethics, however, has sadly been neglected, as if medical doctors felt naturally inclined to ethical practices because they went to medical school and wear white coats or surgical scrubs. By no means do I suggest that IP specialists practice unethically. In fact, all the practitioners I know do their best to provide appropriate and competent patient care based on existing scientific evidence and the resources they have available. The practice of interventional pulmonology does, however, raise a variety of ethical dilemmas for which doctors are not necessarily trained, and situations for which doctors may not be fully aware of potential ethical issues at hand.

Therefore, based on my own experience practicing medicine and surgery around the world in diverse settings, my formal training as a medical ethicist, educator, mediator, and philosopher, and my current work as a philosopher practitioner, I decided to add an Ethics section to the Bronchoscopy International website at www.bronchoscopy.org. I have also prepared a first volume (available for free download in PDF form), Introduction to Ethics in Flexible Bronchoscopy, to serve as an introductory text for practitioners and IP specialists in training. My goal is to provide readers with fundamentals from which they may gain perspective to discuss, evaluate, reflect upon, and more readily address ethical issues faced in their daily practice of interventional pulmonology. My hope is to see ethics discussed in yearly training courses, national meetings, and IP societies’ international conferences. I welcome your feedback and hope this text is a helpful addition to other educational materials used by our profession.

^[i] The Basic Works of Aristotle. Eds Richard McKeon. The Modern Library, Random House, NY, 2001. Nichomachian Ethics, book I, 1094a. WD Ross trans.

IP is what we are, not just what we do

The history of interventional pulmonology is marked by a continuous drive to improve the diagnosis and treatment of lung, airway, and pleural disorders through minimally invasive techniques. From the early days of rigid bronchoscopy and thoracoscopy to the current era of robotic-assisted procedures, augmented reality, fusion imaging, and personalized therapies, interventional pulmonology has evolved into a dynamic and essential component of modern respiratory care. As the field continues to innovate, it promises to further transform the landscapes of pulmonary medicine and thoracic surgery.

This gradual transformation is at the root of a potential identity crisis for the field’s practitioners. This is partly because it is in our human nature to want to delineate ourselves from others, as in the adage, “we are all equal, but some are more equal than others.” It is also because not everyone incorporates all types of airway and pleural procedures into their daily practices. Indeed, several terms are used to describe the field’s practitioners or their area of focus, which can be confusing to medical colleagues as well as patients. These include terms such as bronchoscopy, advanced bronchoscopy, interventional pulmonology, interventional bronchoscopy, and endoluminal airway surgery.

An identity crisis can lead to factions, which breed division rather than unification. This is the real danger of the looming identity crisis for practitioners defined by what they do rather than what they are. For example, can those who perform airway procedures but do not perform thoracoscopy call themselves interventional pulmonologists? And what of those who are not formally trained in pulmonary or pleural procedures, but gain technical skills solely from national meetings and workshops? Or, as in the United States, those who perform interventional procedures but are not board-certified? What of pulmonary specialists who perform diagnostic flexible bronchoscopy but only rarely intervene therapeutically, or those who perform flexible bronchoscopy but do not perform rigid? Are “advanced bronchoscopists” also interventional pulmonologists (by no means do I believe the term ‘advanced’ is meant to be used in its hierarchical sense, but rather only as it applies to specific technologies, which by the way, may not seem as advanced ten years from now)? And, how is the newly fashionable term “endoluminal airway surgery” different from other diagnostic and therapeutic airway procedures?

According to the National Cancer Institute (www.cancer.gov), “intervention” is a treatment, procedure, or other action taken to prevent or treat disease, or improve health in other ways. If we accept this definition, everything we do is “interventional,” but isn’t that also what we are?

Five Key Components of Training

As numbers of interventional pulmonology procedures increase in both scope and applicability, teachers are challenged with finding the best means by which to train their students. Let’s not forget, therefore, that everyone learns differently. The four major ways people receive, and process information are VISUAL, using images, slides, charts and spatial understanding; AUDITORY, by listening to lectures, discussions or audio recordings; READING/WRITING using notes, summaries and textbooks or manuscripts; and KINESTHETIC, through hands-on experiences, physical activity, simulation scenarios, and real-world applications.

Although modern research suggests that learning is most effective when multiple modalities are used, teachers should try to ascertain their students’ preferences, and tailor their training programs accordingly. They should also revise their programs according to the particularities of a region’s customs, traditions, local politics, personalities, and available resources. Of course, regardless of the teaching modalities used, programs should be designed to address five essential components of training. These are cognitive knowledge, simulation-based technical skills, the integration of procedures into practice in a particular medical environment, the acquisition of non-technical skills, and the objective identification of strengths and weaknesses using competency-based assessments.

Let’s Implement Assessment Tools

Doctors have a privileged position because we wear white coats and surgical scrubs, but this does not necessarily make us good teachers. To believe it does is both arrogant and egocentric, vestiges of a tradition where knowledge was dispensed solely from within the ivory towers of academia. I strongly believe in well-structured Train-the-Trainer or Faculty Development Programs, whose value in democratizing knowledge is now well documented. These programs help participants become better teachers, enhance their communication skills, practice using elements such as checklists or 4-box approach exercises in various settings, and become more familiar with educational philosophies and methodologies.

Participants also learn to use validated modern assessment tools such as BSTAT, EBUS-STAT, BRadStat, RIGID-TASC, and for the pleura, tools such as ICC-STAT. The implementation of these tools into regional and national training programs helps teachers who don’t want to presume their students are merely capable of doing procedures based on subjective assessments of their students’ experience and exposure. Instead, by using competency-based assessment tools, modern teachers objectively measure their students’ technical skills for a specific set of procedures. They can identify weaknesses that require remedial training, as well as reinforce or improve upon skills already acquired. This works for airline pilots and surgeons, so it is only natural for it to be equally valuable for interventional pulmonologists….imo.

Real-time Procedure Numbers are Important

Interventional pulmonology entails procedural expertise in a number of conventional and evolving medical procedures. The number of procedural modalities are increasing, however, as is their complexity. In addition to their traditional apprenticeship training, IP specialists use simulators and attend on-site multi-day training courses. These are invaluable for acquiring training for specific procedures, emergencies, and technical skills, but procedural numbers, actually learning by doing in the clinical setting, help develop the judgment, resilience, and nuance that only real-world experience can provide.

Real-time procedural numbers are critical because they represent real-world complexity and unpredictability crucial to learning good decision-making and crisis management. They are important to becoming an “interventional pulmonologist” because situational awareness and experiential knowledge grow over time. They teach stress management and enhance an operator’s confidence. They also abide with legal and regulatory standards, even if these are not yet evidence-based. Finally real-time procedural numbers are crucial to learning communication, leadership, and team-building skills that are applicable in an ever-changing real-world medical environment.

Considering the growing number of IP specialists seeking training, however, institutions are increasingly challenged with finding enough patients to fill the “procedural demand,” and it is uncertain whether all training institutions can honor procedural numbers criteria listed in the specialty’s various guidelines. Finding a satisfactory and ethical solution to this problem is a task the specialty’s leaders must address…soon.

A Glimpse Towards the Future

The history of Interventional Pulmonology (IP) is marked by technological advances, progress in imaging and surgical techniques, the vision of a few key personalities, and the establishment of dozens of IP associations around the world. Important milestones were reached by resolving conflicts with various national and international pulmonary and thoracic surgery societies, and by reexamining the specialty’s self-defined goals and identity.

Despite occasional differences of opinion and instances of competitive rather than collaborative professional interactions, the interventional pulmonology field remains unified by a shared commitment to improving the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of patients with emerging, potentially life-threatening, or advanced lung, airway, and pleural disorders.

For over a century, generations of clinicians, researchers, industrial engineers, basic scientists, physicists, equipment manufacturers, and computer scientists have contributed to innovations aimed at meeting the growing demands for minimally invasive interventions and the challenges of a changing medical landscape. The ongoing pursuit for effective, targeted, and personalized quality patient care ensures that interventional pulmonology will continue to thrive as a dynamic, integrative, and transformative medico-surgical specialty.

However, the approach, scope, timing, and purpose of interventional pulmonology must respond to the needs of a growing population, shifting social and medical demographics, and the advancement of evolving technologies. It must also address challenges posed by an increasing diversity of care environment and a world struggling to overcome significant disparities in medical access, philosophies of care, economics, education, and collaboration.

I believe the future of interventional pulmonology hinges on five key elements, all equally important and inherently interconnected, much like the links in a bicycle chain. These are (1) Greater collaboration across borders for training and education; (2) A strategic shift from reactive to proactive patient care interventions; (3) Building environments that nurture courageous, unselfish, and visionary leadership; (4) Developing a global strategy to address issues of cost and accessibility; and (5) Supporting dreamers, pragmatists, teachers, and students in their quests for professional security in a world increasingly governed by artificial intelligence. IP societies should draft and publish papers addressing each of these elements in a concerted effort to build a foundational blueprint for the years ahead.