Maximilian J Johnston1, John T Paige2, Rajesh Aggarwal3, Dimitrios Stefanidis4, Shawn Tsuda5, Ankur Khajuria6, Sonal Arora7. 1. Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Room 5.03, 5th floor, Wright-Fleming Building, St Mary's Campus, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK. Electronic address: m.johnston@imperial.ac.uk. 2. Department of Surgery, Louisiana State University Health Services Center, New Orleans, LA, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. 4. Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA. 5. Department of Surgery, University of Nevada School of Medicine, NV, USA. 6. Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK. 7. Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Room 5.03, 5th floor, Wright-Fleming Building, St Mary's Campus, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Key research priorities for surgical simulation have been identified in recent years. The aim of this study was to establish the progress that has been made within each research priority and what still remains to be achieved. METHODS: Members of the Association for Surgical Education Simulation Committee conducted individualized literature reviews for each research priority that were brought together by an expert panel. RESULTS: Excellent progress has been made in the assessment of individual and teamwork skills in simulation. The best methods of feedback and debriefing have not yet been established. Progress in answering more complex questions related to competence and transfer of training is slower than other questions. A link between simulation training and patient outcomes remains elusive. CONCLUSIONS: Progress has been made in skills assessment, curricula development, debriefing and decision making in surgery. The impact of simulation training on patient outcomes represents the focus of simulation research in the years to come.
BACKGROUND: Key research priorities for surgical simulation have been identified in recent years. The aim of this study was to establish the progress that has been made within each research priority and what still remains to be achieved. METHODS: Members of the Association for Surgical Education Simulation Committee conducted individualized literature reviews for each research priority that were brought together by an expert panel. RESULTS: Excellent progress has been made in the assessment of individual and teamwork skills in simulation. The best methods of feedback and debriefing have not yet been established. Progress in answering more complex questions related to competence and transfer of training is slower than other questions. A link between simulation training and patient outcomes remains elusive. CONCLUSIONS: Progress has been made in skills assessment, curricula development, debriefing and decision making in surgery. The impact of simulation training on patient outcomes represents the focus of simulation research in the years to come.
Authors: Jacob T Gibby; Samuel A Swenson; Steve Cvetko; Raj Rao; Ramin Javan Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2018-06-22 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Sophia K McKinley; Daniel A Hashimoto; Arian Mansur; Douglas Cassidy; Emil Petrusa; John T Mullen; Roy Phitayakorn; Denise W Gee Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2019-03-08 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Mona W Schmidt; Caelan M Haney; Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski; Vasile V Bintintan; Mohammed Abu Hilal; Alberto Arezzo; Marcus Bahra; Marc G Besselink; Matthias Biebl; Luigi Boni; Michele Diana; Jan H Egberts; Lars Fischer; Nader Francis; Daniel A Hashimoto; Daniel Perez; Marlies Schijven; Moritz Schmelzle; Marek Soltes; Lee Swanstrom; Thilo Welsch; Beat P Müller-Stich; Felix Nickel Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 3.453