Literature DB >> 16153423

Skill retention following proficiency-based laparoscopic simulator training.

Dimitrios Stefanidis1, James R Korndorffer, Rafael Sierra, Cheri Touchard, J Bruce Dunne, Daniel J Scott.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Proficiency-based curricula using both virtual reality (VR) and videotrainer (VT) simulators have proven to be efficient and maximally effective, but little is known about the retention of acquired skills. The purpose of this study was to assess skill retention after completion of a validated laparoscopic skills curriculum.
METHODS: Surgery residents (n=14) with no previous VR or VT experience were enrolled in an Institutional Review Board-approved protocol and sequentially practiced 12 Minimally Invasive Surgical Trainer-VR and 5 VT tasks until proficiency levels were achieved. One VR (manipulate diathermy) and 1 VT (bean drop) tasks were selected for assessment at baseline, after training completion (posttest), and at retention.
RESULTS: All residents completed the curriculum. Posttest assessment occurred at 13.2 +/- 11.8 days and retention assessment at 7.0 +/- 4.0 months. After an early performance decrement at posttest (17%-45%), the acquired skill was maintained up to the end of the follow-up period. For VR, scores were 81.5 +/- 23.5 at baseline, 33.3 +/- 1.8 at proficiency, 48.4 +/- 9.2 at posttest, and 48.4 +/- 11.8 at retention. For VT, scores were 49.4 +/- 12.5 at baseline, 22.0 +/- 1.4 at proficiency, 25.6 +/- 3.6 at posttest, and 26.4 +/- 4.2 at retention. Skill retention was better for VT, compared with VR (P < .02). The extent of skill deterioration did not correlate with training duration or resident level.
CONCLUSIONS: Although residents do not retain all acquired skills (more so for VR than for VT) according to simulator assessment, proficiency-based training on simulators results in durable skills. Additional studies are warranted to further optimize curriculum design, investigate simulator differences, and establish training methods that improve skill retention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16153423     DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2005.06.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surgery        ISSN: 0039-6060            Impact factor:   3.982


  44 in total

1.  Retention of laparoscopic procedural skills acquired on a virtual-reality surgical trainer.

Authors:  Mathilde Maagaard; Jette Led Sorensen; Jeanett Oestergaard; Torur Dalsgaard; Teodor P Grantcharov; Bent S Ottesen; Christian Rifbjerg Larsen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-10-07       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Development and evaluation of a simulator-based laparoscopic training program for surgical novices.

Authors:  Emmeline Nugent; Nicole Shirilla; Adnan Hafeez; Diarmuid S O'Riordain; Oscar Traynor; Anthony M Harrison; Paul Neary
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-07-07       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Virtual reality in orthopaedics: is it a reality?

Authors:  Jay D Mabrey; Karl D Reinig; W Dilworth Cannon
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Effects of virtual reality simulator training method and observational learning on surgical performance.

Authors:  Christopher W Snyder; Marianne J Vandromme; Sharon L Tyra; John R Porterfield; Ronald H Clements; Mary T Hawn
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  No difference in learning retention in manikin-based simulation based on role.

Authors:  Dominic Giuliano; Marion McGregor Dc
Journal:  J Chiropr Educ       Date:  2015-09-14

6.  Acquisition and retention of laparoscopic skills is different comparing conventional laparoscopic and single-incision laparoscopic surgery: a single-centre, prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Scott Michael Ellis; Martin Varley; Stuart Howell; Markus Trochsler; Guy Maddern; Peter Hewett; Tina Runge; Soeren Torge Mees
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Training and outcome monitoring in robotic urologic surgery.

Authors:  Daniel Liberman; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Claudio Jeldres; Luc Valiquette; Kevin C Zorn
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 14.432

8.  Construct and face validity and task workload for laparoscopic camera navigation: virtual reality versus videotrainer systems at the SAGES Learning Center.

Authors:  Dimitrios Stefanidis; Randy Haluck; Tai Pham; J Bruce Dunne; Timothy Reinke; Sarah Markley; James R Korndorffer; Paul Arellano; Daniel B Jones; Daniel J Scott
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-12-06       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  How much do we need experts during laparoscopic suturing training?

Authors:  Siska Van Bruwaene; Gunter De Win; Marc Miserez
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-05-15       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Catheter Insertion and Perioperative Practices Within the ISPD North American Research Consortium.

Authors:  Eric L Wallace; Rachel B Fissell; Thomas A Golper; Peter G Blake; Adriane M Lewin; Matthew J Oliver; Rob R Quinn
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2015-10-22       Impact factor: 1.756

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.