Yohei Kojima1,2, Harry J Wong3,4,5, Kristine Kuchta2, Woody Denham2, Stephen Haggerty2, John Linn2, Michael Ujiki2. 1. Department of Surgery, Kyorin University, Tokyo, Japan. 2. Department of Surgery, NorthShore University HealthSystem, 2650 Ridge Ave, GCSI rmB665, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, Kyorin University, Tokyo, Japan. Harry.Wong@uchospitals.edu. 4. Department of Surgery, NorthShore University HealthSystem, 2650 Ridge Ave, GCSI rmB665, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA. Harry.Wong@uchospitals.edu. 5. Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA. Harry.Wong@uchospitals.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Simulation is an important tool in surgical training. However, the transferability of skills obtained in the simulation setting to the operating room (OR) is uncertain. This study explores the association between resident simulation performance and OR performance in a laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) simulation module. METHODS: A simulation module focused on LC utilizing a virtual reality simulator was completed by general surgery residents. Simulation performance was evaluated using the validated Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) and Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS), as well as a LC-specific simulation assessment form (LC-SIM). Resident subsequent OR performances of LC were measured by the Surgical Training and Assessment Tool (STAT), an online mobile-based evaluation completed by attending surgeons. RESULTS: Twenty-one residents who completed the simulation module and also with STAT data on LC from 2016 to 2020 were included. Higher scores on incision/port placement on LC-SIM is associated with better tissue handling (coefficient 0.20, p = 0.048) and better time & economy of motion on STAT (coefficient 0.22, p = 0.037). However, higher scores on time and motion on OSATS are associated with worse tissue handling (- 0.28, p = 0.046), worse time & economy of motion (- 0.37, p = 0.009), and worse overall grade (- 0.21, p = 0.044). Higher scores on overall performance on OSATS is associated with worse time & economy of motion (- 0.80, p = 0.008). Higher scores on depth perception on GOALS are associated with worse tissue handling (- 0.28, p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: We found significant positive and negative associations between resident simulation performance and OR performance, particularly in tissue handling and economy of motion. This could suggest that simulation performance does not reliably predict OR performance. However, this could highlight the concept of excessive caution in the real OR environment and longer operative time which could be interpreted as worse time and economy of motion by the attending surgeons.
BACKGROUND: Simulation is an important tool in surgical training. However, the transferability of skills obtained in the simulation setting to the operating room (OR) is uncertain. This study explores the association between resident simulation performance and OR performance in a laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) simulation module. METHODS: A simulation module focused on LC utilizing a virtual reality simulator was completed by general surgery residents. Simulation performance was evaluated using the validated Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) and Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS), as well as a LC-specific simulation assessment form (LC-SIM). Resident subsequent OR performances of LC were measured by the Surgical Training and Assessment Tool (STAT), an online mobile-based evaluation completed by attending surgeons. RESULTS: Twenty-one residents who completed the simulation module and also with STAT data on LC from 2016 to 2020 were included. Higher scores on incision/port placement on LC-SIM is associated with better tissue handling (coefficient 0.20, p = 0.048) and better time & economy of motion on STAT (coefficient 0.22, p = 0.037). However, higher scores on time and motion on OSATS are associated with worse tissue handling (- 0.28, p = 0.046), worse time & economy of motion (- 0.37, p = 0.009), and worse overall grade (- 0.21, p = 0.044). Higher scores on overall performance on OSATS is associated with worse time & economy of motion (- 0.80, p = 0.008). Higher scores on depth perception on GOALS are associated with worse tissue handling (- 0.28, p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: We found significant positive and negative associations between resident simulation performance and OR performance, particularly in tissue handling and economy of motion. This could suggest that simulation performance does not reliably predict OR performance. However, this could highlight the concept of excessive caution in the real OR environment and longer operative time which could be interpreted as worse time and economy of motion by the attending surgeons.
Authors: Rajesh Aggarwal; Teodor P Grantcharov; Jens R Eriksen; Dorthe Blirup; Viggo B Kristiansen; Peter Funch-Jensen; Ara Darzi Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Laura K Jones; Bonnie Mowinski Jennings; Melinda K Higgins; Frans B M de Waal Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2018-07-02 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Ramak Roohipoor; Mehdi Yaseri; Amir Teymourpour; Carolyn Kloek; John B Miller; John I Loewenstein Journal: J Surg Educ Date: 2017-04-21 Impact factor: 2.891
Authors: Mark Wilson; John McGrath; Samuel Vine; James Brewer; David Defriend; Richard Masters Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-03-24 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Matthew A Kirkman; Maria Ahmed; Angelique F Albert; Mark H Wilson; Dipankar Nandi; Nick Sevdalis Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2014-06-20 Impact factor: 5.115