OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether any correlation exists between the performance of the Mimic® dV-Trainer (Mimic Technologies, Seattle, Wash., USA) and the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, Calif., USA). METHODS: Twelve participants were recruited, ranging from residents to consultants. We used four training tasks, consisting of 'Pick and Place', 'Peg Board', 'Thread the Rings' and 'Suture Sponge', from the software program of the Mimic dV-Trainer. The performance of the participants was recorded and measured. Additionally, we prepared the same tasks for the da Vinci Surgical System. All participants completed the tasks using the da Vinci Surgical System and were assessed according to time, the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill checklist and the global rating score for endoscopic suturing assessed by two independent blinded observers. After performing these tasks, the participants completed a questionnaire that evaluated the Mimic dV-Trainer's face and content validity. The final results for each participant for the Mimic dV-Trainer and the da Vinci Surgical System were compared. RESULTS: All participants ranked the Mimic dV-Trainer as a realistic training platform that is useful for residency training. There was a significant relationship between the Mimic dV-Trainer and the da Vinci Surgical System in all four tasks. We verified the reliability of the assessment of the checklist and the global rating scores for endoscopic suturing assessed by the two blinded observers using Cronbach's alpha test (r = 0.803, 0.891). CONCLUSIONS: We evaluated the concurrent validity of the Mimic dV-Trainer and the da Vinci Surgical System. Our results suggest the possibility that training using the Mimic dV-Trainer may therefore be able to improve the operator's performance during live robot-assisted surgery.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether any correlation exists between the performance of the Mimic® dV-Trainer (Mimic Technologies, Seattle, Wash., USA) and the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, Calif., USA). METHODS: Twelve participants were recruited, ranging from residents to consultants. We used four training tasks, consisting of 'Pick and Place', 'Peg Board', 'Thread the Rings' and 'Suture Sponge', from the software program of the Mimic dV-Trainer. The performance of the participants was recorded and measured. Additionally, we prepared the same tasks for the da Vinci Surgical System. All participants completed the tasks using the da Vinci Surgical System and were assessed according to time, the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill checklist and the global rating score for endoscopic suturing assessed by two independent blinded observers. After performing these tasks, the participants completed a questionnaire that evaluated the Mimic dV-Trainer's face and content validity. The final results for each participant for the Mimic dV-Trainer and the da Vinci Surgical System were compared. RESULTS: All participants ranked the Mimic dV-Trainer as a realistic training platform that is useful for residency training. There was a significant relationship between the Mimic dV-Trainer and the da Vinci Surgical System in all four tasks. We verified the reliability of the assessment of the checklist and the global rating scores for endoscopic suturing assessed by the two blinded observers using Cronbach's alpha test (r = 0.803, 0.891). CONCLUSIONS: We evaluated the concurrent validity of the Mimic dV-Trainer and the da Vinci Surgical System. Our results suggest the possibility that training using the Mimic dV-Trainer may therefore be able to improve the operator's performance during live robot-assisted surgery.
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