PURPOSE: We developed and validated a standardized assessment tool for robotic surgical skills, and report its usefulness, reliability and construct validity in a clinical setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills is a tool developed by deconstructing the fundamental elements of robotic surgical procedures in consultation with expert robotic surgeons. Surgical performance was assessed during robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy on a 5-point anchored Likert scale across 6 domains. An overall performance score was derived by summing the ratings in each domain. Expert surgeons and postgraduate year 4 to 6 urology residents were evaluated to determine construct validity. Assessments were completed by the attending surgeon, a trained observer and the operator. RESULTS: A total of 29 evaluations of 25 trainees and 4 attending surgeons were completed. Experts scored significantly higher on the assessment than novice operators (p = 0.004). Postgraduate year 4 and 5 residents scored significantly lower than the expert group (p <0.05) while no difference was observed between mean performance scores of postgraduate year 6 trainees and attending surgeons (p >0.05). The internal consistency of the assessment tool was excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.90 to 0.93). The overall assessment score ICC among raters was 0.80 (95% CI 0.65-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: The Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills is simple to administer and able to differentiate levels of robotic surgical expertise. This standardized assessment tool shows excellent consistency, reliability and validity. Further study is warranted to evaluate its usefulness for surgical education and the establishment of competency in robotic surgery.
PURPOSE: We developed and validated a standardized assessment tool for robotic surgical skills, and report its usefulness, reliability and construct validity in a clinical setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills is a tool developed by deconstructing the fundamental elements of robotic surgical procedures in consultation with expert robotic surgeons. Surgical performance was assessed during robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy on a 5-point anchored Likert scale across 6 domains. An overall performance score was derived by summing the ratings in each domain. Expert surgeons and postgraduate year 4 to 6 urology residents were evaluated to determine construct validity. Assessments were completed by the attending surgeon, a trained observer and the operator. RESULTS: A total of 29 evaluations of 25 trainees and 4 attending surgeons were completed. Experts scored significantly higher on the assessment than novice operators (p = 0.004). Postgraduate year 4 and 5 residents scored significantly lower than the expert group (p <0.05) while no difference was observed between mean performance scores of postgraduate year 6 trainees and attending surgeons (p >0.05). The internal consistency of the assessment tool was excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.90 to 0.93). The overall assessment score ICC among raters was 0.80 (95% CI 0.65-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: The Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills is simple to administer and able to differentiate levels of robotic surgical expertise. This standardized assessment tool shows excellent consistency, reliability and validity. Further study is warranted to evaluate its usefulness for surgical education and the establishment of competency in robotic surgery.
Authors: Nabeel A Arain; Genevieve Dulan; Deborah C Hogg; Robert V Rege; Cathryn E Powers; Seifu T Tesfay; Linda S Hynan; Daniel J Scott Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-04-27 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Daniel J Kiely; Walter H Gotlieb; Susie Lau; Xing Zeng; Vanessa Samouelian; Agnihotram V Ramanakumar; Helena Zakrzewski; Sonya Brin; Shannon A Fraser; Pira Korsieporn; Laura Drudi; Joshua Z Press Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2015-05-16
Authors: Abdullah M Alenizi; Roger Valdivieso; Emad Rajih; Malek Meskawi; Cristian Toarta; Marc Bienz; Mounsif Azizi; Pierre Alain Hueber; Hugo Lavigueur-Blouin; Vincent Trudeau; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Assaad El-Hakim; Kevin C Zorn Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2015 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Ahmed A Hussein; Kevin J Sexton; Paul R May; Maxwell V Meng; Abolfazl Hosseini; Daniel D Eun; Siamak Daneshmand; Bernard H Bochner; James O Peabody; Ronney Abaza; Eila C Skinner; Richard E Hautmann; Khurshid A Guru Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-04-13 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Michael I Hanzly; Tareq Al-Tartir; Syed Johar Raza; Atif Khan; Mohammad Manan Durrani; Thomas Fiorica; Phillip Ginsberg; James L Mohler; Boris Kuvshinoff; Khurshid A Guru Journal: Curr Urol Rep Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 3.092
Authors: Neil D Gross; F Christopher Holsinger; J Scott Magnuson; Umamaheswar Duvvuri; Eric M Genden; Tamer Ah Ghanem; Kathleen L Yaremchuk; David Goldenberg; Matthew C Miller; Eric J Moore; Luc Gt Morris; James Netterville; Gregory S Weinstein; Jeremy Richmon Journal: Head Neck Date: 2016-03-07 Impact factor: 3.147