Edward N Spruit1, Guido P H Band, Jaap F Hamming. 1. Cognitive Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, Leiden University, Postbus 9555, 2300 RB, Leiden, The Netherlands, e.n.spruit@fsw.leidenuniv.nl.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to investigate the effects of spaced versus massed practice on skill acquisition and retention in the context of laparoscopic motor skill training. BACKGROUND: Reaching proficiency in performing laparoscopic surgery involves extensive training to acquire the required motor skills. Conventionally, training of such skills occurs during a full day training event utilizing surgical simulators that train specific motor skills pertinent to laparoscopic surgery. An important variable to consider is the optimal schedule for laparoscopic motor training. METHODS: In this study, two groups of trainees without prior experience were trained on a variety of physical box-trainer tasks on different time-schedules. One group received three 75-min training sessions on a single day (massed condition) and the other received one 75-min training session per week for three consecutive weeks (spaced condition). Short- and long-term retention were assessed 2 weeks and 1 year after the completion of training. RESULTS: Outcome measures indicated better performance at the end of training, at a 2-week delayed retention session and at a 1-year retention session for the group that received training on a spaced schedule. This spacing effect was most pronounced for the more difficult laparoscopic training tasks such as intra-corporeal suturing. On average, 21 % of participants in the massed group and 65 % in the spaced group reached proficiency by the end of training. CONCLUSIONS:Spacing practice of laparoscopic motor skill training will facilitate skill acquisition, short-term and long-term retention, and thus, a more efficient learning process for trainees. Though more challenging in terms of logistics, training courses in medical centers should distribute practice sessions over longer time intervals.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to investigate the effects of spaced versus massed practice on skill acquisition and retention in the context of laparoscopic motor skill training. BACKGROUND: Reaching proficiency in performing laparoscopic surgery involves extensive training to acquire the required motor skills. Conventionally, training of such skills occurs during a full day training event utilizing surgical simulators that train specific motor skills pertinent to laparoscopic surgery. An important variable to consider is the optimal schedule for laparoscopic motor training. METHODS: In this study, two groups of trainees without prior experience were trained on a variety of physical box-trainer tasks on different time-schedules. One group received three 75-min training sessions on a single day (massed condition) and the other received one 75-min training session per week for three consecutive weeks (spaced condition). Short- and long-term retention were assessed 2 weeks and 1 year after the completion of training. RESULTS: Outcome measures indicated better performance at the end of training, at a 2-week delayed retention session and at a 1-year retention session for the group that received training on a spaced schedule. This spacing effect was most pronounced for the more difficult laparoscopic training tasks such as intra-corporeal suturing. On average, 21 % of participants in the massed group and 65 % in the spaced group reached proficiency by the end of training. CONCLUSIONS: Spacing practice of laparoscopic motor skill training will facilitate skill acquisition, short-term and long-term retention, and thus, a more efficient learning process for trainees. Though more challenging in terms of logistics, training courses in medical centers should distribute practice sessions over longer time intervals.
Authors: Anthony G Gallagher; E Matt Ritter; Howard Champion; Gerald Higgins; Marvin P Fried; Gerald Moses; C Daniel Smith; Richard M Satava Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Jeanett Strandbygaard; Flemming Bjerrum; Mathilde Maagaard; Per Winkel; Christian Rifbjerg Larsen; Charlotte Ringsted; Christian Gluud; Teodor Grantcharov; Bent Ottesen; Jette Led Sorensen Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Scott Michael Ellis; Martin Varley; Stuart Howell; Markus Trochsler; Guy Maddern; Peter Hewett; Tina Runge; Soeren Torge Mees Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Michael Boettcher; Johannes Boettcher; Stefan Mietzsch; Thomas Krebs; Robert Bergholz; Konrad Reinshagen Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-06-22 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Bruce Negrello Nakata; Worens Cavalini; Eduardo A Bonin; Paolo R Salvalaggio; Marcelo P Loureiro Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-02-24 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Anna H de Vries; Barbara M A Schout; Jeroen J G van Merriënboer; Rob C M Pelger; Evert L Koldewijn; Arno M M Muijtjens; Cordula Wagner Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-07-07 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Jan Breckwoldt; Jan R Ludwig; Joachim Plener; Torsten Schröder; Hans Gruber; Harm Peters Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2016-09-26 Impact factor: 2.463