Literature DB >> 27039189

Robotic surgery training: construct validity of Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS).

Renata Sánchez1,2, Omaira Rodríguez3,4, José Rosciano1, Liumariel Vegas1, Verónica Bond1, Aram Rojas1, Alexis Sanchez-Ismayel1,2.   

Abstract

The objective of this study is to determine the ability of the GEARS scale (Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills) to differentiate individuals with different levels of experience in robotic surgery, as a fundamental validation. This is a cross-sectional study that included three groups of individuals with different levels of experience in robotic surgery (expert, intermediate, novice) their performance were assessed by GEARS applied by two reviewers. The difference between groups was determined by Mann-Whitney test and the consistency between the reviewers was studied by Kendall W coefficient. The agreement between the reviewers of the scale GEARS was 0.96. The score was 29.8 ± 0.4 to experts, 24 ± 2.8 to intermediates and 16 ± 3 to novices, with a statistically significant difference between all of them (p < 0.05). All parameters from the scale allow discriminating between different levels of experience, with exception of the depth perception item. We conclude that the scale GEARS was able to differentiate between individuals with different levels of experience in robotic surgery and, therefore, is a validated and useful tool to evaluate surgeons in training.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Evaluation; GEARS; Robotic surgery; Training

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27039189     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-016-0572-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Robot Surg        ISSN: 1863-2483


  19 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopic skills training and assessment.

Authors:  R Aggarwal; K Moorthy; A Darzi
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 6.939

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.  A global assessment tool for evaluation of intraoperative laparoscopic skills.

Authors:  Melina C Vassiliou; Liane S Feldman; Christopher G Andrew; Simon Bergman; Karen Leffondré; Donna Stanbridge; Gerald M Fried
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 2.565

4.  Validation of surgical simulators.

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

Review 5.  Safe introduction of new procedures and emerging technologies in surgery: education, credentialing, and privileging.

Authors:  Ajit K Sachdeva; Thomas R Russell
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.741

6.  Does robotic assistance improve efficiency in performing complex minimally invasive surgical procedures?

Authors:  Shiva Jayaraman; Douglas Quan; Ibrahim Al-Ghamdi; Firas El-Deen; Christopher M Schlachta
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-07-25       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Is motion analysis a valid tool for assessing laparoscopic skill?

Authors:  John D Mason; James Ansell; Neil Warren; Jared Torkington
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: outcomes comparison based on a large administrative database.

Authors:  Ulrich Guller; Sheleika Hervey; Harriett Purves; Lawrence H Muhlbaier; Eric D Peterson; Steve Eubanks; Ricardo Pietrobon
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the state of the art. A report on 700 consecutive cases.

Authors:  J Périssat; D Collet; R Belliard; J Desplantez; E Magne
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  1992 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: preliminary experience.

Authors:  F Corcione; C Esposito; D Cuccurullo; A Settembre; N Miranda; F Amato; F Pirozzi; P Caiazzo
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-11-18       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  12 in total

1.  Development of a technical checklist for the assessment of suturing in robotic surgery.

Authors:  Ahmad Guni; Nicholas Raison; Ben Challacombe; Shamim Khan; Prokar Dasgupta; Kamran Ahmed
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-09-07       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Teaching and Training Surgeons in Robotic Colorectal Surgery.

Authors:  Mark K Soliman; Alison J Tammany
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2021-09-03

Review 3.  Objective assessment of robotic surgical skills: review of literature and future directions.

Authors:  Saratu Kutana; Daniel P Bitner; Poppy Addison; Paul J Chung; Mark A Talamini; Filippo Filicori
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 3.453

Review 4.  Robotic lobectomy: how to teach thoracic residents.

Authors:  Ricardo Mingarini Terra; Pedro Henrique Cunha Leite; Alberto Jorge Monteiro Dela Vega
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2021-08       Impact factor: 3.005

5.  [New techniques and training methods for robot-assisted surgery and cost-benefit analysis of Ivor Lewis esophagectomy].

Authors:  Alexander Urbanski; Benjamin Babic; Wolfgang Schröder; Lars Schiffmann; Dolores T Müller; Christiane J Bruns; Hans F Fuchs
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  Learning curve of robot-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal (rTAPP) inguinal hernia repair: a cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis.

Authors:  Omar Yusef Kudsi; Naseem Bou-Ayash; Fahri Gokcal; Allison S Crawford; Sebastian K Chung; Alexandra Chudner; Demetrius Litwin
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-04-06       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  The Society of European Robotic Gynaecological Surgery (SERGS) Pilot Curriculum for robot assisted gynecological surgery.

Authors:  Peter Rusch; Rainer Kimmig; Fabrice Lecuru; Jan Persson; Jordi Ponce; Michel Degueldre; René Verheijen
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2017-12-13       Impact factor: 2.344

8.  Recommendations for a standardised educational program in robot assisted gynaecological surgery: Consensus from the Society of European Robotic Gynaecological Surgery (SERGS).

Authors:  P Rusch; T Ind; R Kimmig; A Maggioni; J Ponce; V Zanagnolo; P J Coronado; J Verguts; E Lambaudie; H Falconer; J W Collins; Rhm Verheijen
Journal:  Facts Views Vis Obgyn       Date:  2019-03

Review 9.  Non-Technical Skill Assessment and Mental Load Evaluation in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery.

Authors:  Renáta Nagyné Elek; Tamás Haidegger
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-10       Impact factor: 3.576

10.  Analysis of executional and procedural errors in dry-lab robotic surgery experiments.

Authors:  Kay Hutchinson; Zongyu Li; Leigh A Cantrell; Noah S Schenkman; Homa Alemzadeh
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2022-02-14       Impact factor: 2.483

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.