Mohamed Elessawy1, Mohamed Mabrouk2, Thorsten Heilmann1, Marion Weigel1, Mohamed Zidan3, Ghada Abu-Sheasha4, Andre Farrokh1, Dirk Bauerschlag1, Nicolai Maass1, Mohamed Ibrahim3, Dina Kamel3. 1. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Campus Kiel, University Hospitals Schleswig-Holstein, 24105 Kiel, Germany. 2. Cambridge Endometriosis and Endoscopic Surgery Unit (CEESU), Gynaecology Department, Cambridge University Hospitals Foundation Trust, Cambridge 01223, UK. 3. Alexandria Endoscopy Association (ALEXEA), 21529 Alexandria, Egypt. 4. Department of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Statistics, Medical Research Institute, University of Alexandria, 21519 Alexandria, Egypt.
Abstract
Background and objectives: The primary objective was to evaluate the benefit of training with virtual reality simulation. The secondary objective was to describe the short-term skill acquisition obtained by simulation training and to determine the factors affecting its magnitude. Materials and Methods: We prospectively performed a three-stage evaluation: face, constructive, and predictive to evaluate the training with a laparoscopic simulator with haptic feedback. The participants (n = 63) were divided according to their level of experience into three groups: 16% residents; 46% specialists and 38% were consultants. Results: Face evaluation demonstrates the acceptance of the design and realism of the tasks; it showed a median score of eight (IQR 3) on a Likert scale and 54% of participants (n = 34) gave the tissue feedback a moderate rating. Constructive evaluation demonstrates the improvement of the participants in the training session and the ability of the designed task to distinguish the experienced from the inexperienced surgeon based on the performance score, at task I (transfer of pegs) and II (laparoscopic salpingectomy). There was an improvement in both tasks with a significant increase in score and reduction in time. The study showed that those with a high score at the pre-test recorded a high score post-test, showing a significant pair-wise comparison (Z) and correlation (p) showing a significant statistical significance (p < 0.001). The predictive evaluation demonstrates the beneficiary effect of training four weeks afterward on the practice of surgeons addressed with five questions. It showed an improvement regarding implementation into daily routine, performance of procedure, suturing, shortening of the operative time, and complication management. Conclusions: Virtual reality simulation established high ratings for both realism and training capacity, including clinical relevance, critical relevance, and maintaining training enthusiasm.
Background and objectives: The primary objective was to evaluate the benefit of training with virtual reality simulation. The secondary objective was to describe the short-term skill acquisition obtained by simulation training and to determine the factors affecting its magnitude. Materials and Methods: We prospectively performed a three-stage evaluation: face, constructive, and predictive to evaluate the training with a laparoscopic simulator with haptic feedback. The participants (n = 63) were divided according to their level of experience into three groups: 16% residents; 46% specialists and 38% were consultants. Results: Face evaluation demonstrates the acceptance of the design and realism of the tasks; it showed a median score of eight (IQR 3) on a Likert scale and 54% of participants (n = 34) gave the tissue feedback a moderate rating. Constructive evaluation demonstrates the improvement of the participants in the training session and the ability of the designed task to distinguish the experienced from the inexperienced surgeon based on the performance score, at task I (transfer of pegs) and II (laparoscopic salpingectomy). There was an improvement in both tasks with a significant increase in score and reduction in time. The study showed that those with a high score at the pre-test recorded a high score post-test, showing a significant pair-wise comparison (Z) and correlation (p) showing a significant statistical significance (p < 0.001). The predictive evaluation demonstrates the beneficiary effect of training four weeks afterward on the practice of surgeons addressed with five questions. It showed an improvement regarding implementation into daily routine, performance of procedure, suturing, shortening of the operative time, and complication management. Conclusions: Virtual reality simulation established high ratings for both realism and training capacity, including clinical relevance, critical relevance, and maintaining training enthusiasm.
Entities:
Keywords:
evaluation of virtual reality; laparoscopy; learning curve; surgical simulation
Authors: Tobias Huber; Tom Wunderling; Markus Paschold; Hauke Lang; Werner Kneist; Christian Hansen Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2017-11-18 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Jaisa Olasky; Ganesh Sankaranarayanan; Neal E Seymour; J Harvey Magee; Andinet Enquobahrie; Ming C Lin; Rajesh Aggarwal; L Michael Brunt; Steven D Schwaitzberg; Caroline G L Cao; Suvranu De; Daniel B Jones Journal: Surg Innov Date: 2015-04-29 Impact factor: 2.058
Authors: Martijn P H van Ginkel; Marlies P Schijven; Wilhelmina M U van Grevenstein; Henk W R Schreuder Journal: Surg Innov Date: 2020-08-29 Impact factor: 2.058