BACKGROUND: A high level of psychomotor skills is required to perform minimally invasive surgery (MIS) safely. To assure high quality of skills, it is important to be able to measure and assess these skills. For that, it is necessary to determine aspects that indicate the difference between performances at various levels of proficiency. Measurement and assessment of skills in MIS are best done in an automatic and objective way. The goal of this study was to investigate a set of nine motion-related metrics for their relevance to assess psychomotor skills in MIS during the performance of a labyrinth task. METHODS: Thirty-two surgeons and medical students were divided into three groups according to their level of experience in MIS; experts (>500 MIS procedures), intermediates (31-500 MIS), and novices (no experience in MIS). The participants performed the labyrinth task in the D-box Basic simulator (D-Box Medical, Lier, Norway). The task required bimanual maneuvering and threading a needle through a labyrinth of 10 holes. Nine motion-related metrics were used to assess the MIS skills of each participant. RESULTS: Experts (n = 7) and intermediates (n = 14) performed significantly better than the novices (n = 11) in terms of time and parameters measuring the amount of instrument movement. The experts had significantly better bimanual dexterity, which indicated that they made more simultaneous movements of the two instruments compared to the intermediates and novices. The experts also performed the task with a shorter instrument path length with the nondominant hand than the intermediates. CONCLUSIONS: The surgeon's performance in MIS can be distinguished from a novice by metrics such as time and path length. An experienced surgeon in MIS can be differentiated from a less experienced one by the higher ability to control the instrument in the nondominant hand and the higher degree of simultaneous (coordinated) movements of the two instruments.
BACKGROUND: A high level of psychomotor skills is required to perform minimally invasive surgery (MIS) safely. To assure high quality of skills, it is important to be able to measure and assess these skills. For that, it is necessary to determine aspects that indicate the difference between performances at various levels of proficiency. Measurement and assessment of skills in MIS are best done in an automatic and objective way. The goal of this study was to investigate a set of nine motion-related metrics for their relevance to assess psychomotor skills in MIS during the performance of a labyrinth task. METHODS: Thirty-two surgeons and medical students were divided into three groups according to their level of experience in MIS; experts (>500 MIS procedures), intermediates (31-500 MIS), and novices (no experience in MIS). The participants performed the labyrinth task in the D-box Basic simulator (D-Box Medical, Lier, Norway). The task required bimanual maneuvering and threading a needle through a labyrinth of 10 holes. Nine motion-related metrics were used to assess the MIS skills of each participant. RESULTS: Experts (n = 7) and intermediates (n = 14) performed significantly better than the novices (n = 11) in terms of time and parameters measuring the amount of instrument movement. The experts had significantly better bimanual dexterity, which indicated that they made more simultaneous movements of the two instruments compared to the intermediates and novices. The experts also performed the task with a shorter instrument path length with the nondominant hand than the intermediates. CONCLUSIONS: The surgeon's performance in MIS can be distinguished from a novice by metrics such as time and path length. An experienced surgeon in MIS can be differentiated from a less experienced one by the higher ability to control the instrument in the nondominant hand and the higher degree of simultaneous (coordinated) movements of the two instruments.
Authors: F J Carter; M P Schijven; R Aggarwal; T Grantcharov; N K Francis; G B Hanna; J J Jakimowicz Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2005-10-26 Impact factor: 4.584
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
Authors: Derek T Woodrum; Pamela B Andreatta; Rajani K Yellamanchilli; Lauren Feryus; Paul G Gauger; Rebecca M Minter Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: David A Davis; Paul E Mazmanian; Michael Fordis; R Van Harrison; Kevin E Thorpe; Laure Perrier Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-09-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Kellie K Middleton; Travis Hamilton; Pei-Chien Tsai; Dana B Middleton; John L Falcone; Giselle Hamad Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-06-13 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Miryam C Obdeijn; Tim Horeman; Lisanne L de Boer; Sophie J van Baalen; Philippe Liverneaux; Gabrielle J M Tuijthof Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-12-02 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Tim Horeman; Freek van Delft; Mathijs D Blikkendaal; Jenny Dankelman; John J van den Dobbelsteen; Frank-Willem Jansen Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-02-12 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Fernando Pérez-Escamirosa; Alberto Chousleb-Kalach; Maria Del Carmen Hernández-Baro; Juan Alberto Sánchez-Margallo; Daniel Lorias-Espinoza; Arturo Minor-Martínez Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2016-04-02 Impact factor: 2.924