Literature DB >> 32314094

Training benchmarks based on validated composite scores for the RobotiX robot-assisted surgery simulator on basic tasks.

Erik Leijte1,2, Linda Claassen3, Elke Arts3, Ivo de Blaauw3,4, Camiel Rosman3, Sanne M B I Botden3,4.   

Abstract

The RobotiX robot-assisted virtual reality simulator aims to aid in the training of novice surgeons outside of the operating room. This study aimed to determine the validity evidence on multiple levels of the RobotiX simulator for basic skills. Participants were divided in either the novice, laparoscopic or robotic experienced group based on their minimally invasive surgical experience. Two basic tasks were performed: wristed manipulation (Task 1) and vessel energy dissection (Task 2). The performance scores and a questionnaire regarding the realism, didactic value, and usability were gathered (content). Composite scores (0-100), pass/fail values, and alternative benchmark scores were calculated. Twenty-seven novices, 21 laparoscopic, and 13 robotic experienced participants were recruited. Content validity evidence was scored positively overall. Statistically significant differences between novices and robotic experienced participants (construct) was found for movements left (Task 1 p = 0.009), movements right (Task 1 p = 0.009, Task 2 p = 0.021), path length left (Task 1 p = 0.020), and time (Task 1 p = 0.040, Task 2 p < 0.001). Composite scores were statistically significantly different between robotic experienced and novice participants for Task 1 (85.5 versus 77.1, p = 0.044) and Task 2 (80.6 versus 64.9, p = 0.001). The pass/fail score with false-positive/false-negative percentage resulted in a value of 75/100, 46/9.1% (Task 1) and 71/100, 39/7.0% (Task 2). Calculated benchmark scores resulted in a minority of novices passing multiple parameters. Validity evidence on multiple levels was assessed for two basic robot-assisted surgical simulation tasks. The calculated benchmark scores can be used for future surgical simulation training.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Robot-assisted; Simulation; Surgical education; Validity evidence

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32314094      PMCID: PMC7875949          DOI: 10.1007/s11701-020-01080-9

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


  25 in total

1.  The financial impact of teaching surgical residents in the operating room.

Authors:  M Bridges; D L Diamond
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 2.565

2.  Face validity study of the ProMIS augmented reality laparoscopic suturing simulator.

Authors:  S M B I Botden; J T M Berlage; M P Schijven; J J Jakimowicz
Journal:  Surg Technol Int       Date:  2008

3.  Resident participation in index laparoscopic general surgical cases: impact of the learning environment on surgical outcomes.

Authors:  S Scott Davis; Farah A Husain; Edward Lin; Kalyana C Nandipati; Sebastian Perez; John F Sweeney
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 6.113

4.  Validity assessment of a simulation module for robot-assisted thoracic lobectomy.

Authors:  George Whittaker; Abdullatif Aydin; Sinthuri Raveendran; Faizan Dar; Prokar Dasgupta; Kamran Ahmed
Journal:  Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann       Date:  2018-11-11

5.  The "cost" of operative training for surgical residents.

Authors:  Timothy J Babineau; James Becker; Gary Gibbons; Stephen Sentovich; Donald Hess; Sharon Robertson; Michael Stone
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2004-04

6.  Simulation in surgery: what's needed next?

Authors:  Dimitrios Stefanidis; Nick Sevdalis; John Paige; Boris Zevin; Rajesh Aggarwal; Teodor Grantcharov; Daniel B Jones
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Construct, content and face validity of the eoSim laparoscopic simulator on advanced suturing tasks.

Authors:  Erik Leijte; Elke Arts; Bart Witteman; Jack Jakimowicz; Ivo De Blaauw; Sanne Botden
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-01-22       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Validation and implementation of surgical simulators: a critical review of present, past, and future.

Authors:  B M A Schout; A J M Hendrikx; F Scheele; B L H Bemelmans; A J J A Scherpbier
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-07-25       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Contrasting groups' standard setting for consequences analysis in validity studies: reporting considerations.

Authors:  Morten Jørgensen; Lars Konge; Yousif Subhi
Journal:  Adv Simul (Lond)       Date:  2018-03-09

10.  Head-to-Head Comparison of Three Virtual-Reality Robotic Surgery Simulators.

Authors:  Alexandria M Hertz; Evalyn I George; Christine M Vaccaro; Timothy C Brand
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2018 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.172

View more
  1 in total

1.  Surgical simulation supplements reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship training.

Authors:  Tess Chase; Divya K Shah; J Preston Parry; Bala Bhagavath; Steven R Lindheim; John C Petrozza; Samantha Pfeifer; Christina Stetter; Allen Kunselman; Stephanie J Estes
Journal:  F S Rep       Date:  2020-09-28
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.