Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Comprehensive proficiency-based inanimate training for robotic surgery: reliability, feasibility, and educational benefit

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

We previously developed a comprehensive proficiency-based robotic training curriculum demonstrating construct, content, and face validity. This study aimed to assess reliability, feasibility, and educational benefit associated with curricular implementation.

Methods

Over an 11-month period, 55 residents, fellows, and faculty (robotic novices) from general surgery, urology, and gynecology were enrolled in a 2-month curriculum: online didactics, half-day hands-on tutorial, and self-practice using nine inanimate exercises. Each trainee completed a questionnaire and performed a single proctored repetition of each task before (pretest) and after (post-test) training. Tasks were scored for time and errors using modified FLS metrics. For inter-rater reliability (IRR), three trainees were scored by two raters and analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Data from eight experts were analyzed using ICC and Cronbach’s α to determine test-retest reliability and internal consistency, respectively. Educational benefit was assessed by comparing baseline (pretest) and final (post-test) trainee performance; comparisons used Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

Results

Of the 55 trainees that pretested, 53 (96 %) completed all curricular components in 9–17 h and reached proficiency after completing an average of 72 ± 28 repetitions over 5 ± 1 h. Trainees indicated minimal prior robotic experience and “poor comfort” with robotic skills at baseline (1.8 ± 0.9) compared to final testing (3.1 ± 0.8, p < 0.001). IRR data for the composite score revealed an ICC of 0.96 (p < 0.001). Test-retest reliability was 0.91 (p < 0.001) and internal consistency was 0.81. Performance improved significantly after training for all nine tasks and according to composite scores (548 ± 176 vs. 914 ± 81, p < 0.001), demonstrating educational benefit.

Conclusion

This curriculum is associated with high reliability measures, demonstrated feasibility for a large cohort of trainees, and yielded significant educational benefit. Further studies and adoption of this curriculum are encouraged.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Orvieto MA, Patel VR (2009) Evolution of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Scand J Surg 98:76–88

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Weinberg L, Rao S, Escobar PF (2011) Robotic surgery in gynecology: an updated systematic review. Obstet Gynecol Int 2011:852061

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lee JY, Mucksavage P, Sundaram CP, McDougall EM (2011) Best practices for robotic surgery training and credentialing. J Urol 185:1191–1197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Zorn KC, Gautam G, Shalhav AL, Clayman RV, Ahlering TE, Albala DM, Lee DI, Sundaram CP, Matin SF, Castle EP, Winfield HN, Gettman MT, Lee BR, Thomas R, Patel VR, Leveillee RJ, Wong C, Badlani GH, Rha KH, Eggener SE, Wiklund P, Mottrie A, Atug F, Kural AR, Joseph JV, Members of the Society of Urologic Robotic Surgeons (2009) Training, credentialing, proctoring and medico-legal risks of robotic urological surgery: recommendations of the society of urologic robotic surgeons. J Urol 182:1126–1132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dulan G, Rege RV, Hogg DC, Gilberg-Fisher KM, Arain NA, Tesfay ST, Scott DJ (2012) Developing a comprehensive, proficiency-based training program for robotic surgery. Surgery (in press)

  6. Dulan G, Rege RV, Hogg DC, Gilberg-Fisher K, Tesfay ST, Scott DJ (2012) Content and face validity of a comprehensive skills training program for general surgery, urology, and gynecology robotic operations. Am J Surg 203(4):535–539

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dulan G, Rege RV, Hogg DC, Gilberg-Fisher K, Arain NA, Tesfay ST, Scott DJ (2012) Proficiency-based training for robotic surgery: construct validity, workload, and expert levels for nine inanimate exercises. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-011-2102-6

  8. Gallagher AG, Ritter EM, Satava RM (2003) Fundamental principles of validation, and reliability: rigorous science for the assessment of surgical education and training. Surg Endosc 17:1525–1529

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fried GM, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC, Fraser SA, Stanbridge D, Ghitulescu G, Andrew CG (2004) Proving the value of simulation in laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 240:518–528

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fried GM, Feldman LS (2008) Objective assessment of technical performance. World J Surg 32:156–160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Vassiliou MC, Ghitulescu GA, Feldman LS, Stanbridge D, Leffondre K, Sigman HH, Fried GM (2006) The MISTELS program to measure technical skill in laparoscopic surgery: evidence for reliability. Surg Endsoc 20:744–747

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Goh AC, Goldfarb DW, Sander JC, Miles BJ, Dunkin BJ (2012) Global evaluative assessment of robotic skills: validation of a clinical assessment tool to measure robotic surgical skills. J Urol 187(1):247–252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gall M, Borg W, Gall J (1996) Educational research: an introduction. Longman, White Plains

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Nabeel A. Arain, Genevieve Dulan, Deborah C. Hogg, Robert V. Rege, Cathryn E. Powers, Seifu T. Tesfay, Linda S. Hynan, and Daniel J. Scott have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nabeel A. Arain.

Additional information

Presented at the SAGES 2012 Annual Meeting, March 7–March 10, 2012, San Diego, CA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Arain, N.A., Dulan, G., Hogg, D.C. et al. Comprehensive proficiency-based inanimate training for robotic surgery: reliability, feasibility, and educational benefit. Surg Endosc 26, 2740–2745 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2264-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2264-x

Keywords

Navigation