BACKGROUND: In view of the current emphasis on increasing patient safety and quality control in laparoscopic surgery, there is a growing need to improve laparoscopic training. This study was conducted to investigate if and when residents reached performance standards for basic laparoscopic skills on a boxtrainer and to analyze the current state of implementation of laparoscopic simulators in a gynecological residency curriculum. METHODS: Residents across all 6 years of residency (postgraduate year [PGY] 1-6) were tested once on our boxtrainer by performing five inanimate tasks (pipe cleaner, rubber band, beads, cutting circle, intracorporeal knot tying). A sumscore for the five tasks was calculated for each participant (sum of all scores). Scores were calculated by adding completion time and penalty points, thus rewarding both speed and precision. These data were compared with scores of laparoscopic experts, which were set as performance standards. RESULTS: Of the participants, 111 were residents (7 PGY1, 27 PGY2, 29 PGY3, 28 PGY4, 14 PGY5, 6 PGY6) and 8 were experts. At the end of residency, PGY6 residents reached the performance standard for all tasks except intracorporeal knot tying. It was not until PGY5 that residents reached the performance standard for the pipe cleaner task; PGY1, for rubber band; PGY5, for beads; PGY4, for circle cutting; and PGY6, for sumscore. Throughout residency PGY6 had a mean total of only 3.6 h of simulator training experience. No correlation was found between this previous voluntary simulator training experience and performance on our boxtrainer during this study (sumscore), and between previous voluntary simulator training and total laparoscopic procedures performed. In a combined multivariate analysis, sumscore performance remained significantly associated with the number of laparoscopic procedures performed by residents when they were working as as a primary surgeon (p = 0.002), and not with the cumulative hours of simulator training during residency prior to participating in this study (p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: In a current Dutch gynecological residency curriculum, residents do not reach all performance standards for basic laparoscopic skills on the boxtrainer. We conclude that the voluntary simulator training program has a substantial risk to fail and that the implementation of the laparoscopic skills simulator in the current residency curriculum is in its infancy.
BACKGROUND: In view of the current emphasis on increasing patient safety and quality control in laparoscopic surgery, there is a growing need to improve laparoscopic training. This study was conducted to investigate if and when residents reached performance standards for basic laparoscopic skills on a boxtrainer and to analyze the current state of implementation of laparoscopic simulators in a gynecological residency curriculum. METHODS: Residents across all 6 years of residency (postgraduate year [PGY] 1-6) were tested once on our boxtrainer by performing five inanimate tasks (pipe cleaner, rubber band, beads, cutting circle, intracorporeal knot tying). A sumscore for the five tasks was calculated for each participant (sum of all scores). Scores were calculated by adding completion time and penalty points, thus rewarding both speed and precision. These data were compared with scores of laparoscopic experts, which were set as performance standards. RESULTS: Of the participants, 111 were residents (7 PGY1, 27 PGY2, 29 PGY3, 28 PGY4, 14 PGY5, 6 PGY6) and 8 were experts. At the end of residency, PGY6 residents reached the performance standard for all tasks except intracorporeal knot tying. It was not until PGY5 that residents reached the performance standard for the pipe cleaner task; PGY1, for rubber band; PGY5, for beads; PGY4, for circle cutting; and PGY6, for sumscore. Throughout residency PGY6 had a mean total of only 3.6 h of simulator training experience. No correlation was found between this previous voluntary simulator training experience and performance on our boxtrainer during this study (sumscore), and between previous voluntary simulator training and total laparoscopic procedures performed. In a combined multivariate analysis, sumscore performance remained significantly associated with the number of laparoscopic procedures performed by residents when they were working as as a primary surgeon (p = 0.002), and not with the cumulative hours of simulator training during residency prior to participating in this study (p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: In a current Dutch gynecological residency curriculum, residents do not reach all performance standards for basic laparoscopic skills on the boxtrainer. We conclude that the voluntary simulator training program has a substantial risk to fail and that the implementation of the laparoscopic skills simulator in the current residency curriculum is in its infancy.
Authors: O Traxer; M T Gettman; C A Napper; D J Scott; D B Jones; C G Roehrborn; M S Pearle; J A Cadeddu Journal: J Urol Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: D J Scott; P C Bergen; R V Rege; R Laycock; S T Tesfay; R J Valentine; D M Euhus; D R Jeyarajah; W M Thompson; D B Jones Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Neal E Seymour; Anthony G Gallagher; Sanziana A Roman; Michael K O'Brien; Vipin K Bansal; Dana K Andersen; Richard M Satava Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Gerald M Fried; Liane S Feldman; Melina C Vassiliou; Shannon A Fraser; Donna Stanbridge; Gabriela Ghitulescu; Christopher G Andrew Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Yinin Hu; Robyn N Goodrich; Ivy A Le; Kendall D Brooks; Robert G Sawyer; Philip W Smith; Anneke T Schroen; Sara K Rasmussen Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2015-01-29 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Magdalena K Chmarra; Stefan Klein; Joost C F de Winter; Frank-Willem Jansen; Jenny Dankelman Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2009-11-14 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Willem M Brinkman; Sanne Y Havermans; Sonja N Buzink; Sanne M B I Botden; Jack J Jakimowicz; Benedictus C Schoot Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-02-21 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: S P Rodrigues; T Horeman; M S H Blomjous; E Hiemstra; J J van den Dobbelsteen; F W Jansen Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-05-05 Impact factor: 4.584