M Portelli1, S F Bianco1, T Bezzina2, J E Abela1. 1. Department of Surgery, Mater Dei Hospital, Msida, Malta. 2. Department of Pathology, Mater Dei Hospital, Msida, Malta.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Since its inception, laparoscopic surgery has evolved and new techniques have been developed due to technological advances. This requires a different and more complex skill set in comparison with open surgery. Reduced working hours, less training time and patient safety factors demand that such skills need to be achieved outside the operating theatre environment. Several studies have been published and have determined the effectiveness of virtual reality training. We aimed to compare virtual reality training with the traditional apprenticeship method of training and determine whether it can supplement or replace the traditional apprenticeship model. We also aimed to perform a meta-analysis of the literature and develop conclusions with respect to the benefits achieved by adding virtual reality training on a regular basis to surgical training programmes. METHODS: A literature search was carried out on PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar academic search engines using the MESH terms 'randomised controlled trials', 'virtual reality', 'laparoscopy', 'surgical education' and 'surgical training'. All randomised controlled trials published to January 2018 comparing virtual reality training to apprenticeship training were included. Data were collected on improved dexterity, operative performance and operating times. Each outcome was calculated with 95% confidence intervals and with intention-to-treat analysis; 24 randomised controlled trials were analysed. FINDINGS: Meta-analytical data were extracted for time, path length, instrument handling, tissue handling, error scores and objective structure assessment of technical skills scoring. There was significant improvement in individual trainee skill in all meta-analyses (p < 0.0002). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis shows that virtual reality not only improves efficiency in the trainee's surgical practice but also improves quality with reduced error rates and improved tissue handling.
INTRODUCTION: Since its inception, laparoscopic surgery has evolved and new techniques have been developed due to technological advances. This requires a different and more complex skill set in comparison with open surgery. Reduced working hours, less training time and patient safety factors demand that such skills need to be achieved outside the operating theatre environment. Several studies have been published and have determined the effectiveness of virtual reality training. We aimed to compare virtual reality training with the traditional apprenticeship method of training and determine whether it can supplement or replace the traditional apprenticeship model. We also aimed to perform a meta-analysis of the literature and develop conclusions with respect to the benefits achieved by adding virtual reality training on a regular basis to surgical training programmes. METHODS: A literature search was carried out on PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar academic search engines using the MESH terms 'randomised controlled trials', 'virtual reality', 'laparoscopy', 'surgical education' and 'surgical training'. All randomised controlled trials published to January 2018 comparing virtual reality training to apprenticeship training were included. Data were collected on improved dexterity, operative performance and operating times. Each outcome was calculated with 95% confidence intervals and with intention-to-treat analysis; 24 randomised controlled trials were analysed. FINDINGS: Meta-analytical data were extracted for time, path length, instrument handling, tissue handling, error scores and objective structure assessment of technical skills scoring. There was significant improvement in individual trainee skill in all meta-analyses (p < 0.0002). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis shows that virtual reality not only improves efficiency in the trainee's surgical practice but also improves quality with reduced error rates and improved tissue handling.
Authors: Gerald M Fried; Liane S Feldman; Melina C Vassiliou; Shannon A Fraser; Donna Stanbridge; Gabriela Ghitulescu; Christopher G Andrew Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Andrew J Hung; Mukul B Patil; Pascal Zehnder; Jie Cai; Casey K Ng; Monish Aron; Inderbir S Gill; Mihir M Desai Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-12-15 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jonathan R Thompson; Anthony C Leonard; Charles R Doarn; Matt J Roesch; Timothy J Broderick Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-09-25 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Ellen Hiemstra; Elisabeth M Terveer; Magdalena K Chmarra; Jenny Dankelman; Frank Willem Jansen Journal: Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol Date: 2011-03-27 Impact factor: 2.442
Authors: Rishad Khan; Joanne Plahouras; Bradley C Johnston; Michael A Scaffidi; Samir C Grover; Catharine M Walsh Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-08-17
Authors: E Checcucci; D Amparore; G Volpi; F Piramide; S De Cillis; A Piana; P Alessio; P Verri; S Piscitello; B Carbonaro; J Meziere; D Zamengo; A Tsaturyan; G Cacciamani; Juan Gomez Rivas; S De Luca; M Manfredi; C Fiori; E Liatsikos; F Porpiglia Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-09-01 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Gemma Humm; Helen Mohan; Christina Fleming; Rhiannon Harries; Christopher Wood; Khaled Dawas; Danail Stoyanov; Laurence B Lovat Journal: BJS Open Date: 2022-07-07