Literature DB >> 17593434

FLS simulator performance predicts intraoperative laparoscopic skill.

A L McCluney1, M C Vassiliou, P A Kaneva, J Cao, D D Stanbridge, L S Feldman, G M Fried.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Simulators are being used more and more for teaching and testing laparoscopic skills. However, it has yet to be firmly established that simulator performance reflects operative laparoscopic skill. The study reported here was designed to test the hypothesis that laparoscopic simulator performance predicts intraoperative laparoscopic skill.
METHODS: A review of our prospectively maintained database identified 40 subjects who underwent Fundamentals of Lapraoscopic Surgery (FLS) skills testing and objective intraoperative assessments within the same 6-month period. Subjects consisted of 22 novice (postgraduate year [PGY] 1-2), 10 intermediate (PGY 3-4), and 8 experienced (PGY 5, fellows, and attendings) laparoscopic surgeons. Laparoscopic performance was objectively assessed in the operating room using the previously validated Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skill (GOALS). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare mean FLS scores and mean GOALS scores across experience levels. The relationship between individual FLS scores and GOALS scores was assessed with linear regression analysis. A multivariate analysis evaluated FLS score and surgeon experience as predictors of intraoperative GOALS score. A receiver-operator curve (ROC) was constructed in order to define an FLS cutoff score that predicts intraoperative performance at or above the level of experienced surgeons. Significance was defined as p < 0.05.
RESULTS: Mean FLS scores and mean GOALS scores increased with increasing experience. Individual FLS scores correlated significantly with intraoperative GOALS scores (0.77, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis confirmed that FLS score is an independent predictor of intraoperative GOALS scores. The ROC identified an FLS cutoff score of 70 with optimal sensitivity (91%) and specificity (86%) for predicting a GOALS score at or above the level of experienced surgeons.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study sample, FLS simulator scores were independently predictive of intraoperative laparoscopic performance as measured by GOALS. More precisely, an FLS cutoff score of 70 optimized sensitivity and specificity for expert intraoperative performance. A larger prospective study is justified to validate these findings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17593434     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-007-9451-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  19 in total

1.  Laparoscopic training on bench models: better and more cost effective than operating room experience?

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

2.  Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study.

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

3.  Proving the value of simulation in laparoscopic surgery.

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

4.  A global assessment tool for evaluation of intraoperative laparoscopic skills.

Authors:  Melina C Vassiliou; Liane S Feldman; Christopher G Andrew; Simon Bergman; Karen Leffondré; Donna Stanbridge; Gerald M Fried
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  Laparoscopic skills are improved with LapMentor training: results of a randomized, double-blinded study.

Authors:  Pamela B Andreatta; Derek T Woodrum; John D Birkmeyer; Rajani K Yellamanchilli; Gerard M Doherty; Paul G Gauger; Rebecca M Minter
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  The examination assessment of technical competence in vascular surgery.

Authors:  V A Pandey; J H N Wolfe; C D Liapis; D Bergqvist
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  Teaching surgical skills--changes in the wind.

Authors:  Richard K Reznick; Helen MacRae
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2006-12-21       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Laparoscopic skills laboratories: current assessment and a call for resident training standards.

Authors:  James R Korndorffer; Dimitris Stefanidis; Daniel J Scott
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  The effect of practice on performance in a laparoscopic simulator.

Authors:  A M Derossis; J Bothwell; H H Sigman; G M Fried
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Randomized clinical trial of virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic skills training.

Authors:  T P Grantcharov; V B Kristiansen; J Bendix; L Bardram; J Rosenberg; P Funch-Jensen
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 6.939

View more
  47 in total

1.  Novice surgeons versus experienced surgeons in laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery: a comparison of performances in a surgical simulator.

Authors:  Leonidas Alevizos; Willem Brinkman; Abe Fingerhut; Jack Jakimowicz; Emmanuel Leandros
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Proficiency-based training for robotic surgery: construct validity, workload, and expert levels for nine inanimate exercises.

Authors:  Genevieve Dulan; Robert V Rege; Deborah C Hogg; Kristine M Gilberg-Fisher; Nabeel A Arain; Seifu T Tesfay; Daniel J Scott
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Electronic device for endosurgical skills training (EDEST): study of reliability.

Authors:  J B Pagador; J Uson; M A Sánchez; J L Moyano; J Moreno; P Bustos; J Mateos; F M Sánchez-Margallo
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2010-08-11       Impact factor: 2.924

4.  Global Assessment of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Skills (GAGES): a valid measurement tool for technical skills in flexible endoscopy.

Authors:  Melina C Vassiliou; Pepa A Kaneva; Benjamin K Poulose; Brian J Dunkin; Jeffrey M Marks; Riadh Sadik; Gideon Sroka; Mehran Anvari; Klaus Thaler; Gina L Adrales; Jeffrey W Hazey; Jenifer R Lightdale; Vic Velanovich; Lee L Swanstrom; John D Mellinger; Gerald M Fried
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-01-29       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS™) versus standard laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of performance using a surgical simulator.

Authors:  Byron F Santos; Daniel Enter; Nathaniel J Soper; Eric S Hungness
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-06-29       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Trends and results of the first 5 years of Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) certification testing.

Authors:  Allan Okrainec; Nathaniel J Soper; Lee L Swanstrom; Gerald M Fried
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-09-25       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Achieving Interface and Environment Fidelity in the Virtual Basic Laparoscopic Surgical Trainer.

Authors:  Amine Chellali; Helena Mentis; Amie Miller; Woojin Ahn; Venkata S Arikatla; Ganesh Sankaranarayanan; Suvranu De; Steven D Schwaitzberg; Caroline G L Cao
Journal:  Int J Hum Comput Stud       Date:  2016-07-09       Impact factor: 3.632

8.  FLS assessment of competency using simulated laparoscopic tasks.

Authors:  Gerald M Fried
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2007-10-23       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 9.  Objective assessment of technical performance.

Authors:  Gerald M Fried; Liane S Feldman
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  Surgical simulation in Africa: the feasibility and impact of a 3-day fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery course.

Authors:  Allan Okrainec; Lloyd Smith; Georges Azzie
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-04-03       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.