Gynecological laparoscopy in residency training program: Dutch perspectives

Background Implementation of laparoscopy into residency training is difficult. This study was conducted to assess the current state of implementation of laparoscopic surgery into gynecological residency program, to identify factors influencing laparoscopic skills training, and to find solutions toward better training and implementation. Methods In 2003 a questionnaire was sent to all 68 postgraduate year 5 and year 6 residents in obstetrics and gynecology in The Netherlands. The questionnaire addressed demographics, performance of laparoscopy, self-perceived competence, simulator training, and factors influencing laparoscopic training in residency. Results Of the 68 residents, 60 (88%) responded; 46 (37%) were men and 78 (63%) women. Men showed significant higher mean self-perceived competence in some laparoscopic procedures than women. Of the respondents, 20% had no advanced laparoscopic gynecologist present in their teaching hospital. Residents felt that simulator training is important in relation to their performance in the operating room. Of all gynecological teaching hospitals in the Netherlands, 55% did not have the opportunity of simulator training. Of the respondents who had the possibility of simulator training, 33% did not use the simulator voluntarily. Residents who trained on a simulator felt training was significantly more important (p = 0.02) than residents who never practiced on a simulator. Respondents’ laparoscopic skills were subjectively evaluated in the operating room (92%) or were evaluated based on the number of laparoscopic procedures performed as primary surgeon (49%). Of the respondents, 47% were satisfied with their current laparoscopic skills and 27% also felt prepared for the more advanced procedures. Not having been primary surgeon in nonacademic teaching hospitals and even more so in academic teaching hospitals (p < 0.05) was a limiting factor in acquiring laparoscopic skills. Conclusions Incorporation of basic laparoscopic procedures into residency training has been successful; however, advanced procedures are not. Simulator training is still in its infancy in The Netherlands, is not frequently used voluntarily, and should be mandatory during residency. Acquired laparoscopic skills on a simulator and in the operating room should be objectively assessed, and above all, training of trainers is imperative.     

A competency-based virtual reality training curriculum for the acquisition of laparoscopic psychomotor skill

BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated the beneficial effect of training novice laparoscopic surgeons using virtual reality (VR) simulators, although there is still no consensus regarding an optimal VR training curriculum. This study aims to establish and validate a structured VR curriculum to provide an evidence-based approach for laparoscopic training programmes. METHODS: The minimally invasive VR simulator (MIST-VR) has 12 abstract laparoscopic tasks, each at 3 graduated levels of difficulty (easy, medium, and hard). Twenty medical students completed 2 sessions of all tasks at the easy level, 10 sessions at the medium level, and finally 5 sessions of the 2 most complex tasks at the hard level. At the medium level, subjects were randomized into 2 equal groups performing either all 12 tasks (group A) or the 2 most complex tasks (group B). Performance was measured by time taken, path length, and errors for each hand. The results were compared between groups, and to those of 10 experienced laparoscopic surgeons. RESULTS: Baseline performance of both groups was similar at the easy level. At the medium level, learning curves for all 3 parameters reached plateau at the second (group A, P < .05) and sixth (group B, P < .05) repetitions. Performance at the hard level was similar between the 2 groups, and all achieved the pre-set expert criteria. CONCLUSION: A graduated laparoscopic training curriculum enables trainees to familiarise, train and be assessed on laparoscopic VR simulators. This study can aid the incorporation of VR simulation into established surgical training programmes.     

Construct validity of the ProMIS laparoscopic simulator

Background  Laparoscopic surgery challenges both the surgical novice and experienced open surgeon with unique psychomotor adaptations. Surgical skills assessment has historically relied on subjective opinion and case experience. Objective performance metrics have stimulated much interest in surgical education over the last decade and proficiency-based simulation has been proposed as a paradigm shift in surgical skills training. New assessment tools must be subjected to scientific validation. This study examined the construct validity of a hybrid laparoscopic simulator with in-built motion tracking technology. Methods  Volunteers were recruited from four experience groups (consultant surgeon, senior trainee, junior trainee, medical student). All subjects completed questionnaires and three tasks on the ProMIS laparoscopic simulator (laparoscope orientation, object positioning, sharp dissection). Motion analysis data was obtained via optical tracking of instrument movements. Objective metrics included time, path length (economy of movement), smoothness (controlled handling) and observer-recorded penalty scores. Results  One hundred and sixty subjects completed at least one of the three tasks. Significant group differences were confirmed for number of years qualified, age and case experience. Significant differences were found between experts and novices in all three tasks. Sharp dissection was the strongest discriminator of four recognised laparoscopic skill groups: consultants outperformed students and juniors in all three performance metrics and objective penalty score (p < 0.05), and only accuracy of dissection did not distinguish them from senior trainees (p = 0.261). Seniors dissected faster, more efficiently and more accurately than juniors and students (p < 0.05). Conclusions  ProMIS provides a construct valid laparoscopic simulator and is a feasible tool to assess skills in a cross-section of surgical experience groups. ProMIS has the potential to objectively measure pre-theatre dexterity practice until an agreed proficiency level of dexterity is achieved. Future work should now examine whether training to expert criterion levels on ProMIS correlates with actual operative performance.     

LapSim virtual reality laparoscopic simulator reflects clinical experience in German surgeons

Background and aims The aim of this study was to analyze the ability of a training module on a virtual laparoscopic simulator to assess surgical experience in laparoscopy.Methods One hundred and fifteen participants at the 120th annual convent of the German surgical society took part in this study. All participants were stratified into two groups, one with laparoscopic experience of less than 50 operations (group 1, n=61) and one with laparoscopic experience of more than 50 laparoscopic operations (group 2, n=54). All subjects completed a laparoscopic training module consisting of five different exercises for navigation, coordination, grasping, cutting and clipping. The time to perform each task was measured, as were the path lengths of the instruments and their respective angles representing the economy of the movements. Results between groups were compared using ² or Mann–Whitney U-test.Results Group 1 needed more time for completion of the exercises (median 424 s, range 99–1,376 s) than group 2 (median 315 s, range 168–625 s) (P<0.01). Instrument movements were less economic in group 1 with larger angular pathways, e.g. in the cutting exercise (median 352°, range 104–1,628° vs median 204°, range 107–444°, P<0.01), and longer path lengths (each instrument P<0.05).Conclusion As time for completion of exercises, instrument path lengths and angular paths are indicators of clinical experience, it can be concluded that laparoscopic skills acquired in the operating room transfer into virtual reality. A laparoscopic simulator can serve as an instrument for the assessment of experience in laparoscopic surgery.     

Housestaff performance is improved by participation in a laparoscopic skills curriculum

BACKGROUND: After the implementation of a laparoscopic skills curriculum, we studied two questions: (1) can skills curriculum participation improve performance and (2) can we identify housestaff who may benefit from early instruction in laparoscopic technical skills? METHODS: We administered a six-task laparoscopic skills curriculum to postgraduate year (PGY) 2 and PGY3 surgical housestaff. Six laparoscopic tasks were divided into two groups: generalized skills and task specific skills. All participants were evaluated during a pretest and were placed in the novice group (total score less than 600) or in the intermediate skill (IS) group (total score 600 or more). Each participant had two 1-hour practice/instruction sessions and 2 weeks for independent practice. After these sessions, a posttest was administered. RESULTS: Novices and intermediate skill participants demonstrated significant improvement in general skills and task specific skills. However, comparison of novice and IS group learners revealed that IS group learners were significantly more proficient in the performance of general skills, but the performance of task specific skills failed to demonstrate a difference between the two groups. On posttest, there was no significant difference in overall score between novices and IS participants. CONCLUSIONS: Overall ability and performance of generalized skills by all housestaff are improved with a laparoscopic skills curriculum; however, the performance of novices improved the greatest. Task specific skills did not discriminate novices from more advanced learners. Early testing of housestaff may identify those individuals who could benefit from intervention and instruction prior to performing the laparoscopic skills in the operating room.     

Learning curves and impact of previous operative experience on performance on a virtual reality simulator to test laparoscopic surgical skills

BACKGROUND: The study was carried out to analyze the learning rate for laparoscopic skills on a virtual reality training system and to establish whether the simulator was able to differentiate between surgeons with different laparoscopic experience. METHODS: Forty-one surgeons were divided into three groups according to their experience in laparoscopic surgery: masters (group 1, performed more than 100 cholecystectomies), intermediates (group 2, between 15 and 80 cholecystectomies), and beginners (group 3, fewer than 10 cholecystectomies) were included in the study. The participants were tested on the Minimally Invasive Surgical Trainer-Virtual Reality (MIST-VR) 10 consecutive times within a 1-month period. Assessment of laparoscopic skills included time, errors, and economy of hand movement, measured by the simulator. RESULTS: The learning curves regarding time reached plateau after the second repetition for group 1, the fifth repetition for group 2, and the seventh repetition for group 3 (Friedman's tests P <0.05). Experienced surgeons did not improve their error or economy of movement scores (Friedman's tests, P >0.2) indicating the absence of a learning curve for these parameters. Group 2 error scores reached plateau after the first repetition, and group 3 after the fifth repetition. Group 2 improved their economy of movement score up to the third repetition and group 3 up to the sixth repetition (Friedman's tests, P <0.05). Experienced surgeons (group 1) demonstrated best performance parameters, followed by group 2 and group 3 (Mann-Whitney test P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Different learning curves existed for surgeons with different laparoscopic background. The familiarization rate on the simulator was proportional to the operative experience of the surgeons. Experienced surgeons demonstrated best laparoscopic performance on the simulator, followed by those with intermediate experience and the beginners. These differences indicate that the scoring system of MIST-VR is sensitive and specific to measuring skills relevant for laparoscopic surgery.     

Development and transferability of a cost-effective laparoscopic camera navigation simulator

Background Laparoscopic camera navigation (LCN) is vital for the successful performance of laparoscopic operations, yet little time is spent on training. This study aimed to develop an inexpensive LCN simulator, to design a structured curriculum, and to determine the transferability of skills acquired.Methods In this study, 0° and 30° LCN simulators were developed for use on a videotrainer platform. Transferability was tested by enrolling 20 medical students in an institutional review board-approved, randomized, controlled, blinded protocol. Subjects viewed a video tutorial and were pretested in LCN on a porcine Nissen model. Procedures were videotaped and the LCN performance was scored by a blinded rater according to the number of standardized verbal cues required and the percentage of time an optimal surgical view (%OSV) was obtained. Procedure time also was recorded. Subjects were stratified and randomized. The trained group practiced on the LCN simulator until competency was demonstrated. The control group received no training. Both groups were posttested on the porcine Nissen model.Results The constructed simulators required 35 man hours for development, cost $25 per board for materials, and proved to be durable. The trained group demonstrated significant improvement in verbal cues (p = 0.001), %OSV (p < 0.001), and procedure time (p = 0.001), whereas the control group showed improvement only in verbal cues (p < 0.02). At posttesting, the training group demonstrated significantly better scores for verbal cues (2.1 vs 8.0; p = 0.02) and %OSV (64% vs 45% p = 0.01) than the control group.Conclusion These data suggest that the LCN simulator is cost effective and provides trainees with skills that translate to the operating room.Presented as an oral presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) 3 April 2004, Denver Colorado     

Objective assessment of gastrointestinal endoscopy skills using a virtual reality simulator.

BACKGROUND: This study was carried out to validate the role of virtual reality computer simulation as a method of assessment of psychomotor skills in gastrointestinal endoscopy. We aimed to investigate whether the GI Mentor II computer system (Simbionix Ltd.) was able to differentiate between subjects with different experience with GI endoscopy. METHODS: Twenty-eight subjects were included in the study. They were divided into 3 groups according to their experience with GI endoscopy: experienced [group 1, performed > 200 endoscopic procedures, (n = 8)] residents [group 2, performed < 50 endoscopic procedures, (n = 10)] and medical students [group 3, never performed GI endoscopy, (n = 10)]. All participants received identical pretest instruction on the simulator. Assessment of endoscopic skills was performed during a simulated colonoscopy and was based on parameters measured by the computer system: time, percentage of mucosa surface examined, efficiency of screening, time with a clear view, excessive local pressure, pain, time with pain, loop formation, and total time with a loop. RESULTS: Significant differences in performance existed between surgeons in the 3 groups. Experienced surgeons demonstrated best performance parameters, followed by the residents and the medical students. Significant differences in time (Kruskal-Wallis test, P < 0.001), percentage of mucosa surface examined (P = 0.001), efficiency of screening (P = 0.001), time with a clear view (P = 0.001), pain experienced (P = 0.004), time with pain (P = 0.012), loop formation (P < 0.001), time with a loop (P < 0.001), and excessive local pressure (P = 0.001) were demonstrated. Significant differences existed between group 1 and 2 and 1 and 3 (Mann-Whitney test, P < 0.05). Differences between groups 2 and 3 did not reach statistical significance (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The VR simulator was able to differentiate between subjects with different endoscopic experience. This indicates that the GI Mentor measures skills relevant for gastrointestinal endoscopy and can be used in training programs as an assessment tool.     

Construct validity and assessment of the learning curve for the SIMENDO endoscopic simulator

Background The SIMENDO is an affordable virtual reality simulator designed to train basic psychomotor skills for endoscopic surgery. This study aimed first to establish construct validity by determining which parameters can discriminate groups with different experience levels, and second to establish the extent to which training is useful by determining when inexperienced groups reach expert level. Methods The study participants were divided into four groups according to their experience with endoscopic procedures: experienced group (group A, >50 procedures performed, n = 15), intermediate group (group B, 1–50 procedures performed, n = 18), endoscope navigation group (group C, endoscope navigation experience, n = 14), and novice group (group D, no endoscopic experience, n = 14). Each participant performed three repetitions of six consecutive exercises. The parameters studied were task time, path length of the instruments, and number of errors (collisions). Some participants continued training up to 10 repetitions to get insight in the learning curve. Results Group A (expert) outperformed all the other groups (B, C, and D) in terms of total median task time (p < 0.05), groups C and D in terms of path length, and group D in terms of collision frequency in the first two repetitions. Group B (intermediate) outperformed group D (novice) in total time and endoscope path length for all repetitions, and group C (camera navigation) outperformed group D (novice) in the first repetition. Less experienced groups D and C did not reach expert level for the task time within 10 repetitions, and group B reached it after the eighth repetition (p < 0.05). Conclusion The study was able to establish construct validity for the training program with the simulator under study. The learning curve showed that training with this simulator is useful for subjects with or without limited endoscopic experience. Furthermore, previous endoscopic camera navigation already improves motor skills to more than the basic level.     

Implications of laparoscopy on surgery residency training

Background

With the advent of laparoscopy, many traditional junior-level cases now require advanced laparoscopic skill. We sought to ascertain the implications of laparoscopy on residency training through the use of a large national database.

Methods

American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data were gathered for patients undergoing elective open and laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy, appendectomy, and partial colectomy during 2005 and 2006. Cases were stratified by resident level and compared using univariate analysis.

Results

A total of 14,729 cases were performed during the study period. For inguinal hernia repair, 72% of open repairs were performed by postgraduate year 3 residents or below versus 41% of laparoscopic repairs (P < .0001). Similarly, 61% of open appendectomies were performed by postgraduate year 3 residents or below compared with 48% of laparoscopic appendectomies (P < .0001). Forty-six percent of open colectomies were performed by postgraduate year 3 and postgraduate year 4 residents versus 33% of laparoscopic resections (P < .0001).

Conclusions

These data show an upward shift in cases traditionally performed by junior-level residents. The implications of this shift are unknown but may lead to decreased surgical experience during the early years of training.     

Feasibility and efficacy of gamification in general surgery residency: Preliminary outcomes of residency teams

BackgroundComprehensive studies evaluating the efficacy of team-based competition (“Gamification”) in surgery have not been performed. Board pass rates and resident satisfaction may improve if surgical residents are involved in competition.MethodsResidents at Montefiore Medical Center (Bronx, New York) were surveyed and separated into teams during a draft. Each resident’s performance was converted into a point system. Resident scores were combined into a team score and presented as a leaderboard. Awards were given. ABSITE, ACGME residency satisfaction, and ABS qualifying exam pass rates were compared.ResultsSixty percent of residents are inspired to improve their performance during gamification. ABSITE average percentile score improved from 28 to 43. ABS qualifying exam pass rates improved from 73% to 100%. Resident satisfaction improved from 65% to 88%. The point system allowed for establishing “growth curves” for each resident enabling enhanced assessment of residents.ConclusionsA comprehensive team-based competition inspires performance, is feasible, and seems to improve ABSITE scores, ABS pass rates, and satisfaction while being a tool for assessment of performance.     

Validation of laparoscopic surgical skills training outside the operating room: a long road

Background  Surgical skills training outside the operating room is beneficial. The best methods have yet to be identified. The authors aimed to document the predictive validity of simulation training in three different studies. Methods  Study 1 was a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial comparing performance in the operating room after training on a laparoscopic simulator and after no training. The Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) was used to evaluate operative performance. Study 2 retrospectively reviewed the operative performance of junior residents before and after implementation of a laparoscopic skills training curriculum. Operative time was the variable used to determine resident improvement. Study 3 was a prospective, randomized trial evaluating intern operative performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a porcine model before and after training on a simulator. Operative performance was assessed using GOALS. Results  All three studies failed to demonstrate predictive validity. With GOALS used as the assessment tool, no difference was found between trained and untrained residents in studies 1 and 3. In study 2, the trained group took significantly longer to complete a laparoscopic cholecystectomy than the untrained group. Conclusions  No correlation was found between the three types of training outside the operating room, and no improved operative performance was observed. Possible explanations include too few subjects, training introduced too late in the learning curve, and training criteria that were too easy. Additionally, simulator training focuses on precision, which may actually increase task time. Awareness of these issues can improve the design of future studies. This work was presented at the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) meeting, Philadelphia, PA, April 2008.     

Construct validation of the ProMIS simulator using a novel laparoscopic suturing task

Background The use of simulation for minimally invasive surgery (MIS) skills training has many advantages over current traditional methods. One advantage of simulation is that it enables an objective assessment of technical performance. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the ProMIS augmented reality simulator could objectively distinguish between levels of performance skills on a complex laparoscopic suturing task. Methods Ten subjects — five laparoscopic experts and five laparoscopic novices — were assessed for baseline perceptual, visio-spatial, and psychomotor abilities using validated tests. After three trials of a novel laparoscopic suturing task were performed on the simulator, measures for time, smoothness of movement, and path distance were analyzed for each trial. Accuracy and errors were evaluated separately by two blinded reviewers to an interrater reliability of >0.8. Comparisons of mean performance measures were made between the two groups using a Mann-Whitney U test. Internal consistency of ProMIS measures was assessed with coefficient α. Results The psychomotor performance of the experts was superior at baseline assessment (p < 0.001). On the laparoscopic suturing task, the experts performed significantly better than the novices across all three trials (p < 0.001). They performed the tasks between three and four times faster (p < 0.0001), had three times shorter instrument path length (p < 0.0001), and had four times greater smoothness of instrument movement (p < 0.009). Experts also showed greater consistency in their performance, as demonstrated by SDs across all measures, which were four times smaller than the novice group. Observed internal consistency of ProMIS measures was high (α = 0.95, p < 0.00001). Conclusions Preliminary results of construct validation efforts of the ProMIS simulator show that it can distinguish between experts and novices and has promising psychometric properties. The attractive feature of ProMIS is that a wide variety of MIS tasks can be used to train and assess technical skills.     

The use of a "hybrid" trainer in an established laparoscopic skills program.

OBJECTIVES: Tabletop inanimate trainers have proven to be a safe, inexpensive, and convenient platform for developing laparoscopic skills. Historically, programs that utilize these trainers rely on subjective evaluation of errors and time as the only measures of performance. Virtual reality simulators offer more extensive data collection capability, but they are expensive and lack realism. This study reviews a new electronic proctor (EP), and its performance within the Rosser Top Gun Laparoscopic Skills and Suturing Program. This "hybrid" training device seeks to capture the strengths of both platforms by providing an affordable, reliable, realistic training arena with metrics to objectively evaluate performance. METHODS: An electronic proctor was designed for use in conjunction with drills from the Top Gun Program. The tabletop trainers used were outfitted with an automated electromechanically monitored task arena. Subjects performed 10 repetitions of each of 3 drills: "Cup Drop," "Triangle Transfer," and "Intracorporeal Suturing." In real time, this device evaluates for instrument targeting accuracy, economy of motion, and adherence to the rules of the exercises. A buzzer and flashing light serve to alert the student to inaccuracies and breaches of the defined skill transference parameters. RESULTS: Between July 2001 and June 2003, 117 subjects participated in courses. Seventy-three who met data evaluation criteria were assessed and compared with 744 surgeons who had previously taken the course. The total time to complete each task was significantly longer with the EP in place. The Cup Drop drill with the EP had a mean total time of 1661 seconds (average, 166.10) with 54.49 errors (average, 5.45) vs. 1252 seconds (average, 125.2) without the EP (P = 0.000, t = 6.735, df = 814). The Triangle Transfer drill mean total time was 556 seconds (average, 55.63) and 167.57 errors (average. 16.75) (EP) vs. 454 seconds (non-EP) (average. 45.4) (P = 0.000, t = 4.447, df = 814). The mean total times of the suturing task was 1777 seconds (average, 177.73) and 90.46 errors (average. 9.04) (EP) vs. 1682 seconds (non-EP) (average, 168.2) (P = 0.040, t = 1.150, df = 814). When compared with surgeons who had participated in the Top Gun course prior to EP, the participants in the study collectively scored in the 18.3th percentile with the Cup Drop drill, 22.6th percentile with the Triangle Transfer drill, and 36.7th percentile with the Intracorporeal Suturing exercise. When penalizing for errors recorded by the EP, participants scored collectively in the 9.9th, 0.1th, and 17.7th percentile, respectively. No equipment failures occurred, and the agenda of the course did not have to be modified to accommodate the new platform. CONCLUSIONS: The EP utilized during the Top Gun Course was introduced without modification of the core curriculum and experienced no device failures. This hybrid trainer offers a cost-effective inanimate simulator that brings quality performance monitoring to traditional inanimate trainers. It appears that the EP influenced student performance by alerting them to errors made, thus causing an increased awareness of and focus on precision and accuracy. This suggests that the EP could have internal guidance capabilities. However, validation studies must be done in the future.     

Construct validation of a novel hybrid virtual-reality simulator for training and assessing laparoscopic colectomy; results from the first course for experienced senior laparoscopic surgeons

Objectives  The objective of the study was to determine whether the metrics from a left-sided laparoscopic colectomy (LC) simulator could distinguish between the objectively scored performance of minimally invasive colorectal expert and novice surgeons. We report our results from the first virtual reality-based laparoscopic colorectal training course for experienced laparoscopic surgeons. Methods  Eleven surgeons, experienced but novice in LC, constituted the novice group, and three experienced laparoscopic colorectal surgeons (>300 LCs) served as our experts. Novice subjects received didactic educational sessions and instruction in practice of LC from the experts. All subjects received instruction, demonstration, and supervision on the surgical technique to perform a LC on the simulator. All subjects then performed a laparoscopic colectomy on the simulator. Experts performed the same case as the novices. Outcomes measured by the simulator were time to perform the procedure, instrument path length, and smoothness of the trajectory of the instruments. Anatomy trays from the simulator were objectively scored for explicitly predefined intraoperative errors after each procedure. Results  Expert surgeons performed significantly better then the novice colorectal surgeons with regard to instrument path length, instrument smoothness, and time taken to complete the procedure. Of the 13 predetermined errors, experts made significantly fewer errors in total then the novices (mean score 2.67 versus 4.7, p = 0.03), and performed better in 8 out of 13 errors. Conclusion  The parameters assessed by the ProMIS VR simulator for laparoscopic colorectal training distinguished between novice and expert colorectal surgeons, despite using otherwise experienced novices who had extensive training before the procedure and expert mentoring during it. Experts performed the simulated procedure significantly faster with more efficient use of their instruments, and made fewer intraoperative errors. Thus the simulator demonstrated construct validity.     

Impact of laparoscopy simulator training on the technical skills of future surgeons in the operating room: a prospective study

Background

The efficacy of laparoscopy simulators remains controversial.

Methods

This was a comparative prospective study that evaluated the impact of simulator training on technical competence during a real surgical procedure. Residents were divided into 3 groups: the Mcgill Inanimate System for Training and Evaluation of Laparoscopic Skills (MISTELS) group, training on a simple simulator; LAP Mentor group, training on a virtual simulator; and control group. An initial evaluation was made by a validated score during a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Each resident was then trained for 1 month. A second evaluation was then performed.

Results

Before/after scores were significantly improved in the MISTELS (P = .042) and LAP Mentor (P = .026) groups. It was not the case in the control group. There was a better progression in the MISTELS (P = .026) and LAP Mentor (P = .007) groups than in the control group. There was no significant difference between the MISTELS and LAP Mentor groups.

Conclusions

Simulator training provides a more rapid acquisition of competence in surgical technique.     

The impact of laparoscopic bariatric workshops on the practice patterns of surgeons

Background This study was designed to evaluate the impact of a 2-day laparoscopic bariatric workshop on the practice patterns of participating surgeons. Methods From October 1998 to June 2002, 18 laparoscopic bariatric workshops were attended by 300 surgeons. Questionnaires were mailed to all participants. Results Responses were received from 124 surgeons (41%), among whom were 56 bariatric surgeons (open) (45%), 30 advanced laparoscopic surgeons (24%), and 38 surgeons who performed neither bariatric nor advanced laparoscopic surgery (31%). The questionnaire responses showed that 46 surgeons (37%) currently are performing laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGB), 38 (31%) are performing open gastric bypass, and 39 (32%) are not performing bariatric surgery. Since completion of the course, 46 surgeons have performed 8,893 LGBs (mean, 193 cases/surgeon). Overall, 87 of the surgeons (70%) thought that a limited preceptorship was necessary before performance of LGB, yet only 25% underwent this additional training. According to a poll, the respondents thought that, on the average, 50 cases (range, 10–150 cases) are needed for a claim of proficiency. Conclusion Laparoscopic bariatric workshops are effective educational tools for surgeons wishing to adopt bariatric surgery. Open bariatric surgeons have the highest rates of adopting laparoscopic techniques and tend to participate in more adjunctive training before performing LGB. There was consensus that the learning curve is steep, and that additional training often is necessary. The authors propose a mechanism for post-residency skill acquisition for advanced laparoscopic surgery. Presented at the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) 2003 Scientific Session, 15 March 2003, Los Angeles, California     

Analysis of a structured training programme in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is an established treatment for almost all gallbladder diseases with bile duct injury rates similar to open cholecystectomy. These laparoscopic skills must be passed on to junior surgeons without compromising patient safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analysed our structured training programme over 6years (May 2000 to May 2006) by following three trainee surgeons during their training and beyond. During this period, 1,000 laparoscopic cholecystectomies were carried out with five consultant surgeons supervising and three new trainees who completed their accreditation in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. RESULTS: There were 694 patients operated on by consultant surgeons (Group 1), 202 by trainee surgeons (Group 2) and 104 by newly trained surgeons (Group 3). There were no differences between the groups in terms of age and gender. However, there was a significant difference in gallbladder disease among the three groups; Group 2 had more gallstone pancreatitis patients (P < 0.019). There were no differences among the three groups in conversion rates, bile duct injury rates, general complication rates or length of stay. However, the duration of operation in Group 2 was significantly longer compared to the other two groups (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: This programme is effective in training junior surgeons and does not compromise patient safety.     

Expert and construct validity of the Simbionix GI Mentor II endoscopy simulator for colonoscopy

Objectives The main objectives of this study were to establish expert validity (a convincing realistic representation of colonoscopy according to experts) and construct validity (the ability to discriminate between different levels of expertise) of the Simbionix GI Mentor II virtual reality (VR) simulator for colonoscopy tasks, and to assess the didactic value of the simulator, as judged by experts. Methods Four groups were selected to perform one hand–eye coordination task (EndoBubble level 1) and two virtual colonoscopy simulations on the simulator; the levels were: novices (no endoscopy experience), intermediate experienced (<200 colonoscopies performed before), experienced (200–1,000 colonoscopies performed before), and experts (>1,000 colonoscopies performed before). All participants filled out a questionnaire about previous experience in flexible endoscopy and appreciation of the realism of the colonoscopy simulations. The average time to reach the cecum was defined as one of the main test parameters as well as the number of times view of the lumen was lost. Results Novices (N = 35) reached the cecum in an average time of 29:57 (min:sec), intermediate experienced (N = 15) in 5:45, experienced (N = 20) in 4:19 and experts (N = 35) in 4:56. Novices lost view of the lumen significantly more often compared to the other groups, and the EndoBubble task was also completed significantly faster with increasing experience (Kruskal Wallis Test, p < 0.001). The group of expert endoscopists rated the colonoscopy simulation as 2.95 on a four-point scale for overall realism. Expert opinion was that the GI Mentor II simulator should be included in the training of novice endoscopists (3.51). Conclusion In this study we have demonstrated that the GI Mentor II simulator offers a convincing realistic representation of colonoscopy according to experts (expert validity) and that the simulator can discriminate between different levels of expertise (construct validity) in colonoscopy. According to experts the simulator should be implemented in the training programme of novice endoscopists.     

Effects of a laparoscopic course on student interest in surgical residency.

BACKGROUND: The number of surgical residency applicants has been declining. Early introduction of the discipline of surgery is thought to stimulate early interest in surgical residency. This study investigated the hypothesis that a laparoscopic skills course introduced in preclinical years would stimulate student interest in entering surgical residency. METHODS: Preclinical medical students participated in a laparoscopic skills training course. All students underwent an animate laboratory at the beginning and at the end of the course. Students were divided into 4 separate groups: virtual reality, box trainer, both trainers, and control group. Before and after the course, students were asked their residency interest. First- and second-year medical students participated in the course. RESULTS: Before the course, 56% of the students desired to go into general surgery or a surgical subspecialty. After the course, 49% of the students expressed interest in entering general surgery or a surgical subspecialty. A decrease occurred in students who desired to go into surgical subspecialty residency from 31% to 15% (P = NS), and an increase occurred in students who desired to go into general surgery residency from 25% to 34% (P = NS). No statistically significant difference was seen in the 4 individual training subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in a laparoscopic skills course does not affect medical student interest in entering surgical residency. A trend was noted in students choosing general surgery over surgical subspecialty training after this course. Surgical educators need to investigate methods to encourage preclinical medical student interest in surgical residencies.