Abstract
A safe application of modern surgical technology and computer-assisted surgery devices is based on an operation by adequately trained surgeons who are familiar with the benefits and limitations of the devices. We analyzed the in-depth interviews with seven Spanish and 10 German surgeons. Together with other studies, this analysis highlights the need for specific training in technological competence for surgeons. One way to train technological competence is to help surgeons understanding the basic principles of medical devices as well as explaining the basic concepts of risk analysis and risk management. Based on this premise, a stage model for risk assessment was developed and adapted for the training of surgeons. This was developed further into a train the trainer (TTT) concept, which was then evaluated for two example cases. During TTT-training, the trainers (expert surgeons) performed a risk analysis for several medical devices. Afterwards, the trainers organized a surgical workshop for surgical trainees (resident surgeons), in which high-fidelity simulators and the original medical devices were used. The results showed that the surgeons performed the risk analysis correctly with the stage model and afterwards were able to successfully apply the results in the workshop context.
Acknowledgments
Thanks to the Leipziger Stiftung für Innovation und Technologietransfer, the Saxonian Ministry of Science and Art (SMWK) and the European Social Fonds (ESF) for funding the project. We would also like to thank Zeiss (Oberkochen, Germany) for their support with the operation microscopes used in the Spanish course, and Karl Storz (Tuttlingen, Germany) for their support with the surgical instruments for the FESS and spinal surgery as well as surgical navigation systems used in the German courses. Finally, we thank the Centro de Cirugía de Minima Invasión (CCMIJU) and our clinical partners Prof. Josten, Dr. Vega, Dr. Cenjor and Prof. Strauß.
References
[1] Andrack B, Byrnes T, Weide M, Bernal L, Bausch G, Korb W. Use of a surgeon as a validation instrument: haptic interaction analysis in a high-fidelity simulation environment. In: Proceedings of 2012 Symposium on Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care: Bridging the Gap; Baltimore, MD: March 12–14, 2012.Search in Google Scholar
[2] Bainbridge L. Ironies of automation. Automatica 1983; 19: 775–779.10.1016/B978-0-08-029348-6.50026-9Search in Google Scholar
[3] Bausch G, Adermann J, Andrack B, et al. Design and development process of a next generation training system for spinal surgery. Simulation: transactions of the Society for Modeling and Simulation International, special issue: Medical Simulation 2013; 89: 1436–1441.10.1177/0037549713496151Search in Google Scholar
[4] Bluvband Z, Grabov P. Failure analysis of FMEA. Al Edam 2009; 23: 344–347.10.1109/RAMS.2009.4914700Search in Google Scholar
[5] Burgert O, Neumuth T, Fischer M, et al. Surgical workflow modeling. In: Wetswood JD, editor. Medicine meets virtual reality 14. Fairfax: IOS Press 2006: 36.Search in Google Scholar
[6] Collins A, Brown JS, Newman SE. Cognitive apprenticeship: teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In: Resnick LB, editor. Knowing, learning, and instruction: essays in honor of robert glaser. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 1989: 453–494.10.4324/9781315044408-14Search in Google Scholar
[7] DIN EN ISO 14971, Medizinprodukte – Anwendung des Risikomanagements auf Medizinprodukte (ISO 14971: 2007, korrigierte Fassung 2007-10-01); Deutsche Fassung EN ISO 14971: 2012. ISO 14971 (2013): 2013-04.Search in Google Scholar
[8] Dittmann LU. OntoFMEA. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag GWV Fachverlage GmbH 2007.Search in Google Scholar
[9] Flick U. Qualitative Sozialforschung: Eine Einführung. 4th ed. Rowohlt: Reinbek bei Hamburg 2007.Search in Google Scholar
[10] Geißler N, Byrnes T, Lauer W, et al. Patient safety related to the use of medical devices: a review and investigation of the current status in the medical device industry. Biomed Tech 2013; 58: 67–78.10.1515/bmt-2012-0040Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[11] Geißler N, Hoffmeier A, Kotzsch S, Trapp S, Riemenschneider N, Korb W. Cognitive task analysis – a relevant method for the development of simulation training in surgery. In: de Waard D, Merat N, Jamson H, Barnard Y, Carsten O, editors. Human factors of systems and technology. AX Maastricht: Shaker Publishing 2012: 307–315.Search in Google Scholar
[12] Geißler N, Machno A, Kotzsch S, Hoffmeier A, Strauß G, Korb, W. Technological competence for surgeons – results of an international study. Biomed Tech 2013; 58 (Suppl 1).10.1515/bmt-2013-4410Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[13] Geißler N, Machno A, Pagador Carrasco J, et al. Evaluation of a technological competence training for a navigated functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) surgery. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2014; 9(1 Suppl): 339–340.Search in Google Scholar
[14] Geißler N, Schönwald L, Strauß G, Meixensberger J, Korb W, Bartz D. Bewertung visueller Signalgestaltung in der Chirurgie mittels Eye-Tracking. i-com Zeitschrift für interaktive und kooperative Medien, 2013; 12: 2, 2–11.10.1515/icom.2013.0010Search in Google Scholar
[15] Geißler N, Strauss G, Jannin P, Korb W. Effects of automation to the surgeons. IFMBE Proc 2010; 25: 154–157.10.1007/978-3-642-03895-2_45Search in Google Scholar
[16] Hoffmeier A, El Khaoua I, Korb W, Rastan A. Teamklima, Teamarbeit und Kommunikation im OP. In: Gesellschaft für Arbeitswissenschaft e. V., editors. Mensch, Technik, Organisation – Vernetzung im Produktentstehungs- und -herstellungsprozess. Bericht zum 57. Kongress der Gesellschaft für Arbeitswissenschaft vom 23. –25. März 2011. Dortmund: GfA-Press 2011: 927–930.Search in Google Scholar
[17] Johnson-Laird P. Mental models. Cambridge: Harvard University Press 1983.Search in Google Scholar
[18] Korb W, Geißler N, Strauß G. Solving challenges in inter-and transdisciplinary working teams: lessons from the surgical technology field. Artific Intell Med 2015; 63: 209–219.10.1016/j.artmed.2015.02.001Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[19] Korb W, Geissler N, Strauss G. A concept for a new working and training culture for CAS research teams. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2013; 8: 392.Search in Google Scholar
[20] Leape LL. The preventability of medical injury. In: Bogner MS, editor. Human error in medicine. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Publisher 1994: 13–26.10.1201/9780203751725-2Search in Google Scholar
[21] Lemke HU, Berliner L. Systems design and management of the digital operating room. Int J CARS 2001; 6: 144–158.Search in Google Scholar
[22] Machno A, Korb W, Seifert A, Winkler D, Meixensberger J. Evaluierung von Risikomanagementtools für die Analyse der Mensch-Maschine-Interaktion in der computerassistierten Chirurgie. 44. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Biomedizinische Technik (DGBMT) in Rostock. 2010.Search in Google Scholar
[23] Machno A, Korb W, Winkler D, Fischer J, Meixensberger J. Risk assessment of software use in computer assisted surgery. International Conference on Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery. Geneva 2010.Search in Google Scholar
[24] Matern U, Koneczny S, Scherrer M, Gerlings T. Arbeitsbedingungen und Sicherheit am Arbeitsplatz OP. DÄ 2006; 103: A 3187–92.Search in Google Scholar
[25] Mathieu J, Heffner TS, Goodwin GF, Salas E, Cannon-Bowers JA. The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. J Appl Psychol 2000; 85: 273–283.10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.273Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[26] Militello LG, Hutton RJB. Applied cognitive task analysis (ACTA): a practitioner’s toolkit for understanding cognitive task demands. Ergonomics 1998; 41: 1618–1641.10.1080/001401398186108Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[27] Reason J. Human errors. Cambridge: University Press 1990.10.1017/CBO9781139062367Search in Google Scholar
[28] Reason J. The human contribution: unsafe acts, accidents and heroic recoveries. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Limited 2008.Search in Google Scholar
[29] Rigotti T, Schyns B, Mohr G. A short version of the occupational self-efficacy scale: structural and construct validity across five countries. J Career Assessment 2008; 16: 238–255.10.1177/1069072707305763Search in Google Scholar
[30] Tashakkori A, Teddlie C, editors. Handbook of mixed methods in social and behaviorial research. California: Sage Publication 2003.Search in Google Scholar
[31] Wickens CD, Colcombe A. Performance consequences of imperfect alerting automation associated with a cockpit display of traffic information. Hum Factors 2007; 49: 839–850.10.1518/001872007X230217Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[32] Wickens CD, McCarley JS. Applied attention theory. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press 2008.10.1201/9781420063363Search in Google Scholar
[33] Zachary W, Ryder JM, Hicinbothom JH. Building cognitive task analyses and models of a decision-making team in a complex real-time environment. In: Schraagen JM, Chipman S, Shalin VL, editors. Cognitive task analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 2000: 365–383.Search in Google Scholar
©2016 by De Gruyter
