Chien-Hung Liao1, Chun-Hsiang Ooyang1, Chih-Chi Chen2, Chien-An Liao1, Chi-Tung Cheng1, Ming-Ju Hsieh3, Chi-Hsun Hsieh1, Chun-Yi Tsai4, Ta-Sen Yeh4, Chun-Nan Yeh4, Chih-Yuan Fu5. 1. Department of Traumatology and Emergency Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan. 2. Department of Physical medicine and Rehabilitation, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Linkou, Taoyuan Taiwan. 3. Department of Cardiovascular and thoracic Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan. 4. Department of General Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan. 5. Department of Traumatology and Emergency Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan. Electronic address: surgymet@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A video coaching (VC) system has been developed in surgical education. This study compares the educational effect on technical and nontechnical skills of the VC method for teaching laparoscopic surgery. DESIGN: We conducted a prospectively randomized study of an education program to teach laparoscopic procedures. SETTING: The study was performed at the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, a university hospital in Taiwan. PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled sixteen first- or second-year surgical residents.The participants were randomized into VC and conventional teaching (CT) groups, and their surgical skills were judged by the Global Operation Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) and the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS). Nontechnical skills were evaluated by the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS) assessment and self-efficacy questionnaires (SEQs). After the program, posttraining scores were compared to assess improvements. RESULTS: The 16 enrolled participants finished the entire course and completed all the videos during the study period. Comparing the VC and CT groups, we found that the pretraining GOALS, OSATS, NOTSS and SEQ scores were similar between both groups. However, after training, the OSATS score gain was higher in the VC groupthan in the CT group (9.25 ± 2.05 vs. 6.50 ± 1.51, p=0.009). Regarding nontechnical skills, the NOTSS score improved more in the VC group than in the CT group (5.50 ± 0.93 vs. 4.25 ± 0.89, p=0.015). The SEQ score was also higher in the VC group (32.13 ± 2.10) than in the CT group (29.50 ± 1.77), with a significant difference (p=0.018). CONCLUSION: VC can help surgeons build their expertise using a more accessible method. Additionally, VC can shorten the learning curve and improve self-efficacy, thereby contributing to surgeons' education.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: A video coaching (VC) system has been developed in surgical education. This study compares the educational effect on technical and nontechnical skills of the VC method for teaching laparoscopic surgery. DESIGN: We conducted a prospectively randomized study of an education program to teach laparoscopic procedures. SETTING: The study was performed at the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, a university hospital in Taiwan. PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled sixteen first- or second-year surgical residents.The participants were randomized into VC and conventional teaching (CT) groups, and their surgical skills were judged by the Global Operation Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) and the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS). Nontechnical skills were evaluated by the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS) assessment and self-efficacy questionnaires (SEQs). After the program, posttraining scores were compared to assess improvements. RESULTS: The 16 enrolled participants finished the entire course and completed all the videos during the study period. Comparing the VC and CT groups, we found that the pretraining GOALS, OSATS, NOTSS and SEQ scores were similar between both groups. However, after training, the OSATS score gain was higher in the VC groupthan in the CT group (9.25 ± 2.05 vs. 6.50 ± 1.51, p=0.009). Regarding nontechnical skills, the NOTSS score improved more in the VC group than in the CT group (5.50 ± 0.93 vs. 4.25 ± 0.89, p=0.015). The SEQ score was also higher in the VC group (32.13 ± 2.10) than in the CT group (29.50 ± 1.77), with a significant difference (p=0.018). CONCLUSION: VC can help surgeons build their expertise using a more accessible method. Additionally, VC can shorten the learning curve and improve self-efficacy, thereby contributing to surgeons' education.