Laparoscopy and RoboticsFace, Content, and Construct Validation of the da Vinci Skills Simulator
Section snippets
Material and Methods
A convenience cohort of 38 medical students, residents, and attending physicians from 5 services (urology, otolaryngology, cardiac surgery, thoracic surgery, and gynecology) participated in this prospective, institutional review board–approved study. Participants were classified as novice (no past performance of robotic cases), intermediate (past performance of 1-74 robotic cases) and expert (past performance of ≥75 robotic cases) according to review of a centralized case log. None of the
Results
The novice group (n = 19) consisted of 18 medical students and 1 resident. All participants in the novice group had 0 robotic cases. The intermediate group (n = 8) included 6 residents, 1 fellow, and 1 attending. Of note, all participants classified as intermediate had between 1 and 25 cases except the attending physician who had 130 cases but had not been on the console in more than 5 years. It was because of this lack of recent robotic surgical experience and unfamiliarity with the newer
Comment
The field of robotic surgery has seen sustained growth since the early 2000s. In 2010, an estimated 98 000 da Vinci prostatectomy procedures and 110 000 da Vinci hysterectomy procedures were preformed, both significant increases over 2009, which saw 90,000 and 69,000 performed, respectively. Overall, an estimated 278 000 da Vinci procedures were performed in 2010, compared with 205,000 in 2009.11, 12 The growth of robotics has been in both numbers and scope. With more specialties adopting
Conclusions
Our study confirms face, content, and, construct validation of the commercially available dVSS. The eventual role of VR simulation in robotic surgical training, credentialing, and proctoring has yet to be determined and should be evaluated in larger, multiinstitutional studies.
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the US Army Medical Research and Materiel Command under Contract No W81XWH-10-1-1058.
The views, opinions and/or findings contained manuscript are those of the author(s) and should not be construed as an official Department of the Army position, policy or decision unless so designated by other documentation.
References (12)
- et al.
Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: what is the learning curve?
Urology
(2005) - et al.
Prospective comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted anatomic prostatectomy: the Vattikuti Urology Institute experience
Urology
(2002) - et al.
The cost of learning robotic-assisted prostatectomy
Urology
(2008) - et al.
Development and validation of a comprehensive program of education and assessment of the basic fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery
Surgery
(2004) - et al.
Face, content, and construct validity of dV-Trainer, a novel virtual reality simulator for robotic surgery
Urology
(2009) - et al.
Face, content and construct validity of a novel robotic surgery simulator
J Urol
(2011)
Cited by (92)
Proficiency Levels and Validity Evidence for Scoring Metrics for a Virtual Reality and Inanimate Robotic Surgery Simulation Curriculum
2024, Journal of Surgical EducationAugmented and virtual reality in spine surgery
2023, Journal of OrthopaedicsVirtual Reality Simulation Has Weak Correlation with Overall Trainee Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Performance
2022, Journal of Minimally Invasive GynecologySimulators
2022, Endorobotics: Design, R and D and Future TrendsRobotic Surgery Training: Current Trends and Future Directions
2021, Urologic Clinics of North AmericaHaptics and virtual reality for oral and maxillofacial surgery
2021, Computer-Aided Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery: Developments, Applications, and Future Perspectives