Cho Rok Lee1,2, Seoung Yoon Rho3, Sang Hyup Han4, Young Moon5, Sun Young Hwang5, Young Joo Kim5, Chang Moo Kang6,7. 1. Department of Thyroid and Endocrine Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea. 2. The Education Committee of the Korean Association of Robotic Surgeons 2016-2017, Seoul, Korea. 3. Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea. 4. Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, Seoul, Korea. 5. Robot and MIS Center, Severance Hospital, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea. 6. Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea. cmkang@yuhs.ac. 7. The Education Committee of the Korean Association of Robotic Surgeons 2016-2017, Seoul, Korea. cmkang@yuhs.ac.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare the effectiveness of a custom-made skills simulator (CMSS) with the commercially available da Vinci® skills simulator (DVSS) that help improving surgical skills for effective and safe robotic surgical interventions. METHODS: A randomized control study was conducted to determine the performance of participants after undergoing robotic surgical training. Total 64 students who had no previous experience with robotic surgery enrolled this study. After 5 min-introduction of robotic surgical system, the participants got random-assignment into two groups to perform either CMSS-or DVSS-exercises. After 15 min-practicing the corresponding simulator, task-execution performance and individual questionnaires were compared between participants trained with the CMSS and those trained with the DVSS. RESULTS: Regardless of simulator the participants used, the system understanding and manipulation ability of the participants was found to be higher than after completing the simulation-based robotic surgical training (p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in terms of the required time to complete the tasks, and improvement of understanding the concept of robotic surgery, or surgical skill capacity between two groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The training effectiveness of CMSS was not significantly different to DVSS. It can be synergetic tool to DVSS for novice trainees of robotic surgery to get accustomed to the robotic surgical system and to improve their basic robotic surgical skills.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: To compare the effectiveness of a custom-made skills simulator (CMSS) with the commercially available da Vinci® skills simulator (DVSS) that help improving surgical skills for effective and safe robotic surgical interventions. METHODS: A randomized control study was conducted to determine the performance of participants after undergoing robotic surgical training. Total 64 students who had no previous experience with robotic surgery enrolled this study. After 5 min-introduction of robotic surgical system, the participants got random-assignment into two groups to perform either CMSS-or DVSS-exercises. After 15 min-practicing the corresponding simulator, task-execution performance and individual questionnaires were compared between participants trained with the CMSS and those trained with the DVSS. RESULTS: Regardless of simulator the participants used, the system understanding and manipulation ability of the participants was found to be higher than after completing the simulation-based robotic surgical training (p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in terms of the required time to complete the tasks, and improvement of understanding the concept of robotic surgery, or surgical skill capacity between two groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The training effectiveness of CMSS was not significantly different to DVSS. It can be synergetic tool to DVSS for novice trainees of robotic surgery to get accustomed to the robotic surgical system and to improve their basic robotic surgical skills.
Authors: Alberto Breda; Angelo Territo; Luis Gausa; Volkan Tuğcu; Antonio Alcaraz; Mireia Musquera; Karel Decaestecker; Liesbeth Desender; Michael Stockle; Martin Janssen; Paolo Fornara; Nasreldin Mohammed; Giampaolo Siena; Sergio Serni; Luis Guirado; Carma Facundo; Nicolas Doumerc Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2017-09-12 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Hamid Abboudi; Mohammed S Khan; Omar Aboumarzouk; Khurshid A Guru; Ben Challacombe; Prokar Dasgupta; Kamran Ahmed Journal: BJU Int Date: 2012-06-06 Impact factor: 5.588