Literature DB >> 23389060

Which skills really matter? proving face, content, and construct validity for a commercial robotic simulator.

Calvin Lyons1, David Goldfarb, Stephen L Jones, Niraj Badhiwala, Brian Miles, Richard Link, Brian J Dunkin.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A novel computer simulator is now commercially available for robotic surgery using the da Vinci(®) System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA). Initial investigations into its utility have been limited due to a lack of understanding of which of the many provided skills modules and metrics are useful for evaluation. In addition, construct validity testing has been done using medical students as a "novice" group-a clinically irrelevant cohort given the complexity of robotic surgery. This study systematically evaluated the simulator's skills tasks and metrics and established face, content, and construct validity using a relevant novice group.
METHODS: Expert surgeons deconstructed the task of performing robotic surgery into eight separate skills. The content of the 33 modules provided by the da Vinci Skills Simulator (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) was then evaluated for these deconstructed skills and 8 of the 33 determined to be unique. These eight tasks were used for evaluating the performance of 46 surgeons and trainees on the simulator (25 novices, 8 intermediate, and 13 experts). Novice surgeons were general surgery and urology residents or practicing surgeons with clinical experience in open and laparoscopic surgery but limited exposure to robotics. Performance was measured using 85 metrics across all eight tasks.
RESULTS: Face and content validity were confirmed using global rating scales. Of the 85 metrics provided by the simulator, 11 were found to be unique, and these were used for further analysis. Experts performed significantly better than novices in all eight tasks and for nearly every metric. Intermediates were inconsistently better than novices, with only four tasks showing a significant difference in performance. Intermediate and expert performance did not differ significantly.
CONCLUSION: This study systematically determined the important modules and metrics on the da Vinci Skills Simulator and used them to demonstrate face, content, and construct validity with clinically relevant novice, intermediate, and expert groups. These data will be used to develop proficiency-based training programs on the simulator and to investigate predictive validity.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23389060     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-012-2704-7

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


  9 in total

1.  Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes.

Authors:  Mani Menon; Alok Shrivastava; Ashutosh Tewari; Richard Sarle; Ashok Hemal; James O Peabody; Guy Vallancien
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Global evaluative assessment of robotic skills: validation of a clinical assessment tool to measure robotic surgical skills.

Authors:  Alvin C Goh; David W Goldfarb; James C Sander; Brian J Miles; Brian J Dunkin
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-11-17       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Validation study of a virtual reality robotic simulator--role as an assessment tool?

Authors:  Jason Y Lee; Phillip Mucksavage; David C Kerbl; Victor B Huynh; Mohamed Etafy; Elspeth M McDougall
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Validation of surgical simulators.

Authors:  Elspeth M McDougall
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.942

5.  Face, content, and construct validity of dV-trainer, a novel virtual reality simulator for robotic surgery.

Authors:  Patrick A Kenney; Matthew F Wszolek; Justin J Gould; John A Libertino; Alireza Moinzadeh
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-04-10       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 6.  Contemporary virtual reality laparoscopy simulators: quicksand or solid grounds for assessing surgical trainees?

Authors:  Anthony S Thijssen; Marlies P Schijven
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2010-01-18       Impact factor: 2.565

7.  The advanced learning curve in robotic prostatectomy: a multi-institutional survey.

Authors:  Hugh J Lavery; David B Samadi; Rahul Thaly; David Albala; Thomas Ahlering; Arieh Shalhav; Peter Wiklund; Ashutosh Tewari; Randy Fagin; Anthony J Costello; Geoff Coughlin; Vipul R Patel
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2009-09-04

8.  Face, content and construct validity of a novel robotic surgery simulator.

Authors:  Andrew J Hung; Pascal Zehnder; Mukul B Patil; Jie Cai; Casey K Ng; Monish Aron; Inderbir S Gill; Mihir M Desai
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-07-23       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Validation of a novel virtual reality robotic simulator.

Authors:  Amanjot S Sethi; William J Peine; Yousef Mohammadi; Chandru P Sundaram
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 2.942

  9 in total
  25 in total

1.  Development of a virtual reality robotic surgical curriculum using the da Vinci Si surgical system.

Authors:  Pedro Pablo Gomez; Ross E Willis; Kent R Van Sickle
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-11-01       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Current state of virtual reality simulation in robotic surgery training: a review.

Authors:  Justin D Bric; Derek C Lumbard; Matthew J Frelich; Jon C Gould
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-08-25       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Validation of a virtual reality-based robotic surgical skills curriculum.

Authors:  Michael Connolly; Johnathan Seligman; Andrew Kastenmeier; Matthew Goldblatt; Jon C Gould
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-01-01       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Construct validity of nine new inanimate exercises for robotic surgeon training using a standardized setup.

Authors:  Anthony M Jarc; Myriam Curet
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-10-08       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery.

Authors:  Amir Szold; Roberto Bergamaschi; Ivo Broeders; Jenny Dankelman; Antonello Forgione; Thomas Langø; Andreas Melzer; Yoav Mintz; Salvador Morales-Conde; Michael Rhodes; Richard Satava; Chung-Ngai Tang; Ramon Vilallonga
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  The safety of urologic robotic surgery depends on the skills of the surgeon.

Authors:  Erika Palagonia; Elio Mazzone; Geert De Naeyer; Frederiek D'Hondt; Justin Collins; Pawel Wisz; Fijs W B Van Leeuwen; Henk Van Der Poel; Peter Schatteman; Alexandre Mottrie; Paolo Dell'Oglio
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-08-19       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Assessment of Robotic Console Skills (ARCS): construct validity of a novel global rating scale for technical skills in robotically assisted surgery.

Authors:  May Liu; Shreya Purohit; Joshua Mazanetz; Whitney Allen; Usha S Kreaden; Myriam Curet
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Innovations in surgery simulation: a review of past, current and future techniques.

Authors:  Ido Badash; Karen Burtt; Carlos A Solorzano; Joseph N Carey
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-12

9.  Prior video game utilization is associated with improved performance on a robotic skills simulator.

Authors:  Andrew C Harbin; Kumar S Nadhan; James H Mooney; Daohai Yu; Joshua Kaplan; Nora McGinley-Hence; Andrew Kim; Yiming Gu; Daniel D Eun
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-11-16

10.  A methodological, task-based approach to Procedure-Specific Simulations training.

Authors:  Yaki Setty; Oren Salzman
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2016-07-04       Impact factor: 2.924

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.