Literature DB >> 19622984

Assessing vaginal surgical skills using video motion analysis.

Gouri B Diwadkar1, Antonie van den Bogert, Matthew D Barber, J Eric Jelovsek.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the feasibility of using video motion analysis to quantitate a key step of vaginal hysterectomy and define measurable differences between novice and experienced surgical trainees during vaginal hysterectomy.
METHODS: Analyses focused on clamping, transecting, and suturing the left uterosacral ligament. Using a cutoff of 25, trainees were grouped as experienced (n=14) and novice (n=9) based on the total number of vaginal hysterectomies performed by each trainee. Contrasting-groups analysis was used to determine cutoff values that separated novices from experts.
RESULTS: Novice trainees took longer (112 seconds compared with 84 seconds) and had greater cumulative translational motion (92 cm compared with 49 cm, P=.05) while performing the task. Experienced trainees placed the Heaney clamp closer to a right angle to the vertical axis (experienced 96 degrees compared with novice 109 degrees , P=.03) while passing the needle through the uterosacral ligament. Trainees move from novice to experts when the steps occur in 112 or fewer seconds, cumulative translational motion is at or less than 75 cm, and the angle between the clamp to bladder retractor is at or below 105 degrees .
CONCLUSION: Video motion analysis is a feasible technique to quantify and compare surgical skills objectively during vaginal surgery. There are measurable differences between novice and more experienced surgical trainees performing vaginal hysterectomy that can be quantified using motion analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19622984     DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181af25e6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  2 in total

1.  Use of the QR Reader to Provide Real-Time Evaluation of Residents' Skills Following Surgical Procedures.

Authors:  Kellin Reynolds; Danny Barnhill; Jamie Sias; Amy Young; Florencia Greer Polite
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2014-12

2.  Contrasting groups' standard setting for consequences analysis in validity studies: reporting considerations.

Authors:  Morten Jørgensen; Lars Konge; Yousif Subhi
Journal:  Adv Simul (Lond)       Date:  2018-03-09
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.