Yasser A Noureldin1,2, David M Hoenig3, Philip Zhao4, Sammy E Elsamra3, Joshua Stern5, Geoffrey Gaunay3, Piruz Motamedinia3,6, Zeph Okeke3, Ardeshir R Rastinehad7, Robert M Sweet8,9. 1. Department of Surgery, WWAMI Institute for Simulation in Healthcare (WISH), University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 2. Department of Urology, Benha Faculty of Medicine, Benha University, Benha, Egypt. 3. The Smith Institute for Urology, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, New Hyde Park, NY, USA. 4. Department of Urology, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. 5. Department of Urology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA. 6. Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA. 7. Icahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai, New York, NY, USA. 8. Department of Surgery, WWAMI Institute for Simulation in Healthcare (WISH), University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. rsweet@uw.edu. 9. Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. rsweet@uw.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess for usefulness and validity evidence for incorporating the C-Arm Trainer (CAT) simulator into the annual AUA hands on course for training percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The course started with a didactic session followed by four stations for training the "bull's eye" technique using the CAT simulator. Each station included a pre-test, 30-min practice on the simulator, and post-test. All participants were assessed using a 4-item checklist. All participants were asked to fill in a qualitative self-assessment questionnaire after the pre- and the post-test, and respond to a course evaluation questionnaire and post-course survey. RESULTS: A total of 38 physicians, who attended the hands on course, voluntarily participated in the study. Only 21.1% had previous practice on PCNL simulators. Compared with the results of the checklist total score and the qualitative self-assessment questionnaire scores after the pre-test, there was significant improvement in the checklist total score (p < 0.001), temporal demands (p = 0.003), situational stress (p = 0.003, and performance (0.003) after the post-test. A total of 14 (36%) participants responded to the course evaluation questionnaire, 50% evaluated the course as excellent, 28.6% as very good, and 21.4% as good. Unfortunately, only five (13%) participants responded to the post-course survey, 4/5 implemented the new competencies and knowledge into their practice, and 3/5 have attempted to obtain fluoroscopic guided PCA without assistance. CONCLUSION: The CAT simulator was considered useful for training the percutaneous renal access procedure. There was significant improvement in the qualitative and quantitative assessment parameters after the post-test compared with the pre-test.
OBJECTIVES: To assess for usefulness and validity evidence for incorporating the C-Arm Trainer (CAT) simulator into the annual AUA hands on course for training percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The course started with a didactic session followed by four stations for training the "bull's eye" technique using the CAT simulator. Each station included a pre-test, 30-min practice on the simulator, and post-test. All participants were assessed using a 4-item checklist. All participants were asked to fill in a qualitative self-assessment questionnaire after the pre- and the post-test, and respond to a course evaluation questionnaire and post-course survey. RESULTS: A total of 38 physicians, who attended the hands on course, voluntarily participated in the study. Only 21.1% had previous practice on PCNL simulators. Compared with the results of the checklist total score and the qualitative self-assessment questionnaire scores after the pre-test, there was significant improvement in the checklist total score (p < 0.001), temporal demands (p = 0.003), situational stress (p = 0.003, and performance (0.003) after the post-test. A total of 14 (36%) participants responded to the course evaluation questionnaire, 50% evaluated the course as excellent, 28.6% as very good, and 21.4% as good. Unfortunately, only five (13%) participants responded to the post-course survey, 4/5 implemented the new competencies and knowledge into their practice, and 3/5 have attempted to obtain fluoroscopic guided PCA without assistance. CONCLUSION: The CAT simulator was considered useful for training the percutaneous renal access procedure. There was significant improvement in the qualitative and quantitative assessment parameters after the post-test compared with the pre-test.
Entities:
Keywords:
Assessment; Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy; Skills; Training
Authors: Bodo E Knudsen; Edward D Matsumoto; Ben H Chew; Brooke Johnson; Vitaly Margulis; Jeffrey A Cadeddu; Margaret S Pearle; Stephen E Pautler; John D Denstedt Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Alison Walzak; Maria Bacchus; Jeffrey P Schaefer; Kelly Zarnke; Jennifer Glow; Charlene Brass; Kevin McLaughlin; Irene W Y Ma Journal: Acad Med Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 6.893
Authors: Khurshid R Ghani; Sero Andonian; Matthew Bultitude; Mihir Desai; Guido Giusti; Zhamshid Okhunov; Glenn M Preminger; Jean de la Rosette Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-02-11 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Dean Assimos; Amy Krambeck; Nicole L Miller; Manoj Monga; M Hassan Murad; Caleb P Nelson; Kenneth T Pace; Vernon M Pais; Margaret S Pearle; Glenn M Preminger; Hassan Razvi; Ojas Shah; Brian R Matlaga Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-05-27 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Connor M Forbes; Jonathan Lim; Justin Chan; Ryan F Paterson; Mantu Gupta; Ben H Chew; Kymora Scotland Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 1.862