G M Saleh1, K Theodoraki, S Gillan, P Sullivan, F O'Sullivan, B Hussain, C Bunce, I Athanasiadis. 1. 1] NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, UK [2] Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, UK [3] School of Ophthalmology, The London Deanery, London, UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the variability of performance among novice ophthalmic trainees in a range of repeated tasks using the Eyesi virtual reality (VR) simulator. METHODS: Eighteen subjects undertook three attempts of five cataract specific and generic three-dimensional tasks: continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis, cracking and chopping, cataract navigation, bimanual cataract training, anti-tremor. Scores for each attempt were out of a maximum of 100 points. A non-parametric test was used to analyse the data, where a P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Highly significant differences were found between the scores achieved in the first attempt and that during the second (P<0.0001) and third (P<0.0001) but not between the second and third attempt (P=0.65). There was no significant variability in the overall score between the users (P=0.1104) or in the difference between their highest and lowest score (P=0.3878). Highly significant differences between tasks were shown both in the overall score (P=0.0001) and in the difference between highest and lowest score (P=0.003). CONCLUSION: This study, which is the first to quantify reproducibility of performance in entry level trainees using a VR tool, demonstrated significant intra-novice variability. The cohort of subjects performed equally overall in the range of tasks (no inter-novice variability) but each showed that performance varies significantly with the complexity of the task when using this high-fidelity instrument.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the variability of performance among novice ophthalmic trainees in a range of repeated tasks using the Eyesi virtual reality (VR) simulator. METHODS: Eighteen subjects undertook three attempts of five cataract specific and generic three-dimensional tasks: continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis, cracking and chopping, cataract navigation, bimanual cataract training, anti-tremor. Scores for each attempt were out of a maximum of 100 points. A non-parametric test was used to analyse the data, where a P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Highly significant differences were found between the scores achieved in the first attempt and that during the second (P<0.0001) and third (P<0.0001) but not between the second and third attempt (P=0.65). There was no significant variability in the overall score between the users (P=0.1104) or in the difference between their highest and lowest score (P=0.3878). Highly significant differences between tasks were shown both in the overall score (P=0.0001) and in the difference between highest and lowest score (P=0.003). CONCLUSION: This study, which is the first to quantify reproducibility of performance in entry level trainees using a VR tool, demonstrated significant intra-novice variability. The cohort of subjects performed equally overall in the range of tasks (no inter-novice variability) but each showed that performance varies significantly with the complexity of the task when using this high-fidelity instrument.
Authors: Daniel J Solverson; Robert A Mazzoli; William R Raymond; Mark L Nelson; Elizabeth A Hansen; Mark F Torres; Anuja Bhandari; Craig D Hartranft Journal: Simul Healthc Date: 2009 Impact factor: 1.929
Authors: George M Saleh; Dan Lindfield; Dawn Sim; Elena Tsesmetzoglou; Vinod Gauba; David S Gartry; Salim Ghoussayni Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2009-06
Authors: Anthony Spiteri; Rajesh Aggarwal; Tom Kersey; Larry Benjamin; Ara Darzi; Philip Bloom Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2009-07-23 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Marina Roizenblatt; Vitor Dias Gomes Barrios Marin; Alex Treiger Grupenmacher; Felipe Muralha; Jean Faber; Kim Jiramongkolchai; Peter Louis Gehlbach; Michel Eid Farah; Rubens Belfort; Mauricio Maia Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: G M Saleh; K Theodoraki; S Gillan; P Sullivan; F O'Sullivan; B Hussain; C Bunce; I Athanasiadis Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2014-02-21 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Daniel Shu Wei Ting; Shaun Sebastian Khung Peng Sim; Christine Wen Leng Yau; Mohamad Rosman; Ai Tee Aw; Ian Yew San Yeo Journal: Int J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-06-18 Impact factor: 1.779
Authors: Shameema Sikder; Jia Luo; P Pat Banerjee; Cristian Luciano; Patrick Kania; Jonathan C Song; Eman S Kahtani; Deepak P Edward; Abdul-Elah Al Towerki Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2015-01-20