Literature DB >> 27637688

Using virtual reality to maintain surgical skills during periods of robotic surgery inactivity.

Loredana M Guseila1, Archana Saranathan1, Eric L Jenison2, Karen M Gil2, John J Elias3.   

Abstract

Periodic practice is needed for newly trained robotic surgeons to maintain skills during periods of robotic inactivity. The current study was performed to determine whether virtual robotic skill maintenance can serve as an adequate substitute for practice on a surgical robot. Eleven surgical residents with no prior robotic training were trained to a level of robotic proficiency with inanimate models, including a needle driving pad, a running suture pad, and ring placement on a rocking peg board. After reaching proficiency, each resident was tested on a complex tissue closure task. For the next 8 weeks, the only robotic activity was biweekly virtual robotic skills maintenance. After 8 weeks, the residents performed the tissue closure task twice with the robot, followed by evaluation on the inanimate models used to reach proficiency. Repeated-measures statistical analyses were used to compare between the three tissue closure trials and between the final test at week 0 and the evaluation at week 8 for the other inanimate models. Time to complete the tissue closure task was more than 20 % lower for the second evaluation at 8 weeks than for the other two trials (p < 0.05). Residents maintained their skills for needle driving, but times for suture running and rocking peg board increased by more than 20 % at 8 weeks (p < 0.01). Virtual practice shows promise for maintaining robotic skills. Following a warm-up period, some skills may actually improve with biweekly virtual practice, but skill retention is selective, so further improvements are needed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Robotic surgery; Surgical skills; Training; Virtual reality

Year:  2014        PMID: 27637688     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-014-0465-0

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


  28 in total

1.  Validation study of a virtual reality robotic simulator--role as an assessment tool?

Authors:  Jason Y Lee; Phillip Mucksavage; David C Kerbl; Victor B Huynh; Mohamed Etafy; Elspeth M McDougall
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Validating the use of the Mimic dV-trainer for robotic surgery skill acquisition among urology residents.

Authors:  Ruslan Korets; Adam C Mues; Joseph A Graversen; Mantu Gupta; Mitchell C Benson; Kimberly L Cooper; Jaime Landman; Ketan K Badani
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2011-10-15       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology fellowship programs in the USA: a survey of fellows and fellowship directors.

Authors:  Gregory P Sfakianos; Peter J Frederick; James E Kendrick; J Michael Straughn; Larry C Kilgore; Warner K Huh
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2010-09-17       Impact factor: 2.547

4.  Robotic virtual reality simulation plus standard robotic orientation versus standard robotic orientation alone: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Christine M Vaccaro; Catrina C Crisp; Angela N Fellner; Christopher Jackson; Steven D Kleeman; James Pavelka
Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg       Date:  2013 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.091

5.  Objective evaluation of expert and novice performance during robotic surgical training tasks.

Authors:  Timothy N Judkins; Dmitry Oleynikov; Nick Stergiou
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-04-29       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Validation, correlation, and comparison of the da Vinci trainer(™) and the daVinci surgical skills simulator(™) using the Mimic(™) software for urologic robotic surgical education.

Authors:  Michael A Liss; Corollos Abdelshehid; Stephen Quach; Achim Lusch; Joseph Graversen; Jaime Landman; Elspeth M McDougall
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2012-10-02       Impact factor: 2.942

7.  Content and construct validation of a robotic surgery curriculum using an electromagnetic instrument tracker.

Authors:  Timothy J Tausch; Timothy M Kowalewski; Lee W White; Patrick S McDonough; Timothy C Brand; Thomas S Lendvay
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-07-20       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Transoral robotic surgery: simulation-based standardized training.

Authors:  Ning Zhang; Baran D Sumer
Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 6.223

9.  Objective measures for longitudinal assessment of robotic surgery training.

Authors:  Rajesh Kumar; Amod Jog; Balazs Vagvolgyi; Hiep Nguyen; Gregory Hager; Chi Chiung Grace Chen; David Yuh
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2011-12-14       Impact factor: 5.209

10.  Robotic surgical skills: acquisition, maintenance, and degradation.

Authors:  Eric L Jenison; Karen M Gil; Thomas S Lendvay; Michael S Guy
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2012 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

View more
  2 in total

1.  Efficiency and Accuracy of Robotic Surgical Performance Decayed Among Urologists During COVID-19 Shutdown.

Authors:  Balint Der; Daniel Sanford; Ryan Hakim; Erik Vanstrum; Jessica H Nguyen; Andrew J Hung
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2020-12-11       Impact factor: 2.619

2.  A Standardized Robotic Training Curriculum in a General Surgery Program.

Authors:  Harley Moit; Anthony Dwyer; Michelle De Sutter; Sally Heinzel; David Crawford
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2019 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.