Defining a structured training program for acquiring basic and advanced laparoscopic psychomotor skills in a simulator

Comparing proficiency of obstetrics and gynaecology trainees with general surgery trainees using simulated laparoscopic tasks in Health Education England, North-West: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Training programmes for obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G) and general surgery (GS) vary significantly, but both require proficiency in laparoscopic skills. We sought to determine performance in each specialty.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational study.

SETTING

Health Education England North-West, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

47 surgical trainees (24 O&G and 23 GS) were subdivided into four groups: 11 junior O&G, 13 senior O&G, 11 junior GS and 12 senior GS trainees.

OBJECTIVES

Trainees were tested on four simulated laparoscopic tasks: laparoscopic camera navigation (LCN), hand-eye coordination (HEC), bimanual coordination (BMC) and suturing with intracorporeal knot tying (suturing).

RESULTS

O&G trainees completed LCN (p<0.001), HEC (p<0.001) and BMC (p<0.001) significantly slower than GS trainees. Furthermore, O&G found fewer number of targets in LCN (p=0.001) and dropped a greater number of pins than the GS trainees in BMC (p=0.04). In all three tasks, there were significant differences between O&G and GS trainees but no difference between the junior and senior groups within each specialty. Performance in suturing also varied by specialty; senior O&G trainees scored significantly lower than senior GS trainees (O&G 11.4±4.4 vs GS 16.8±2.1, p=0.03). Whilst suturing scores improved with seniority among O&G trainees, there was no difference between the junior and senior GS trainees (senior O&G 11.4±4.4 vs junior O&G 3.6±2.1, p=0.004).

DISCUSSION

GS trainees performed better than O&G trainees in core laparoscopic skills, and the structure of O&G training may require modification.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT05116332).

The Future in Standards of Care for Gynecologic Laparoscopic Surgery to Improve Training and Education

Standards of care offer doctors and patients the confidence that an established quality, evidence-based, care is provided, and represent a tool for optimal responding to the population’s needs. It is expected that they will increasingly express a multimodal relationship with gynecologic laparoscopy. Laparoscopy is, now, a standard procedure in operative gynecology, standards are embedded in many laparoscopic procedures, standardization of the skills/competency assessment has been progressively developed, and the proof of competency in laparoscopy may become a standard of care. A continuous development of surgical education includes standard equipment (that may bring value for future advance), standardized training, testing (and performance) assessment, educational process and outcome monitoring/evaluation, patients’ care, and protection, etc. Standards of care and training have a reciprocally sustaining relationship, as training is an essential component of standards of care while care is provided at higher standards after a structured training and as credentialing/certification reunites the two. It is envisaged that through development and implementation, the European wide standards of care in laparoscopic surgery (in close harmonization with personalized medicine) would lead to effective delivery of better clinical services and provide excellent training and education.

A randomized control trial to evaluate the importance of pre-training basic laparoscopic psychomotor skills upon the learning curve of laparoscopic intra-corporeal knot tying

Background

Training of basic laparoscopic psychomotor skills improves the acquisition of more advanced laparoscopic tasks, such as laparoscopic intra-corporeal knot tying (LICK). This randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate whether pre-training of basic skills, as laparoscopic camera navigation (LCN), hand-eye coordination (HEC), and bimanual coordination (BMC), and the combination of the three of them, has any beneficial effect upon the learning curve of LICK. The study was carried out in a private center in Asunción, Paraguay, by 80 medical students without any experience in surgery. Four laparoscopic tasks were performed in the ENCILAP model (LCN, HEC, BMC, and LICK). Participants were allocated to 5 groups (G1-G5). The study was structured in 5 phases. In phase 1, they underwent a base-line test (T₁) for all tasks (1 repetition of each task in consecutive order). In phase 2, participants underwent different training programs (30 consecutive repetitions) for basic tasks according to the group they belong to (G1: none; G2: LCN; G3: HEC; G4: BMC; and G5: LCN, HEC, and BMC). In phase 3, they were tested again (T₂) in the same manner than at T₁. In phase 4, they underwent a standardized training program for LICK (30 consecutive repetitions). In phase 5, they were tested again (T₃) in the same manner than at T₁ and T₂. At each repetition, scoring was based on the time taken for task completion system.

Results

The scores were plotted and non-linear regression models were used to fit the learning curves to one- and two-phase exponential decay models for each participant (individual curves) and for each group (group curves). The LICK group learning curves fitted better to the two-phase exponential decay model. From these curves, the starting points (Y0), the point after HEC training/before LICK training (Y1), the Plateau, and the rate constants (K) were calculated. All groups, except for G4, started from a similar point (Y0). At Y1, G5 scored already better than the others (G1 p = .004; G2 p = .04; G3 p < .0001; G4 NS). Although all groups reached a similar Plateau, G5 has a quicker learning than the others, demonstrated by a higher K (G1 p < 0.0001; G2 p < 0.0001; G3 p < 0.0001; and G4 p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Our data confirms that training improves laparoscopic skills and demonstrates that pre-training of all basic skills (i.e., LCN, HEC, and BMC) shortens the LICK learning curve.

Dominant hand, non-dominant hand, or both? The effect of pre-training in hand-eye coordination upon the learning curve of laparoscopic intra-corporeal knot tying

Background

Training of basic laparoscopic psychomotor skills improves both acquisition and retention of more advanced laparoscopic tasks, such as laparoscopic intra-corporeal knot tying (LICK). This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was performed to evaluate the effect of different pre-training programs in hand-eye coordination (HEC) upon the learning curve of LICK.

Results

The study was performed in a private center in Asunción, Paraguay, by 60 residents/specialists in gynaecology with no experience in laparoscopic surgery. Participants were allocated in three groups. In phase ₁, a baseline test was performed (T₁, three repetitions). In phase 2, participants underwent different training programs for HEC (60 repetitions): G1 with both the dominant hand (DH) and the non-dominant hand (NDH), G2 with the DH only, G3 none. In phase 3, a post HEC/pre LICK training test was performed (T₂, three repetitions). In phase 4, participants underwent a standardized training program for LICK (60 repetitions). In phase 5, a final test was performed (T₃, three repetitions). The score was based on the time taken for task completion system. The scores were plotted and non-linear regression models were used to fit the learning curves to one- and two-phase exponential decay models for each participant (individual curves) and for each group (group curves). For both HEC and LICK, the group learning curves fitted better to the two-phase exponential decay model. For HEC with the DH, G1 and G2 started from a similar point, but G1 reached a lower plateau at a higher speed. In G1, the DH curve started from a lower point than the NDH curve, but both curves reached a similar plateau at comparable speeds. For LICK, all groups started from a similar point, but immediately after HEC training and before LICK training, G1 scored better than the others. All groups reached a similar plateau but with a different decay, G1 reaching this plateau faster than the others groups.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that pre-training in HEC with both the DH and the NDH shortens the LICK learning curve.

Retention of laparoscopic psychomotor skills after a structured training program depends on the quality of the training and on the complexity of the task

This follow-up RCT was conducted to evaluate laparoscopic psychomotor skills retention after finishing a structured training program. In a first study, 80 gynecologists were randomly allocated to four groups to follow different training programs for hand-eye coordination (task 1) with the dominant hand (task 1-a) and the non-dominant hand (task 1-b) and laparoscopic intra-corporeal knot tying (task 2) in the Laparoscopic Skills Testing and Training (LASTT) model. First, baseline skills were tested (T1). Then, participants trained task 1 (G1: 1-a and 1-b, G2: 1-a only, G3 and G4: none) and then task 2 (all groups but G4). After training all groups were tested again to evaluate skills acquisition (T2). For this study, 2 years after a resting period, 73 participants were recruited and tested again to evaluate skills retention (T3). All groups had comparable skills at T1 for all tasks. At T2, G1, G2, and G3 improved their skills, but the level of improvement was different (G1 = G2 > G3 > G4 for task 1; G1 = G2 = G3 > G4 for task 2). At T3, all groups retained their task 1 skills at the same level than at T2. For task 2, however, a skill decay was already noticed for G2 and G3, being G1 the only group that retained their skills at the post-training level. Training improves laparoscopic skills, which can be retained over time depending on the comprehensiveness of the training program and on the complexity of the task. For high complexity tasks, full training is advisable for both skills acquisition and retention.

Gynaecological endoscopic surgical education and assessment. A diploma programme in gynaecological endoscopic surgery

In recent years, training and education in endoscopic surgery has been critically reviewed. Clinicians, both surgeons as gynaecologist who perform endoscopic surgery without proper training of the specific psychomotor skills, are at higher risk to increased patient morbidity and mortality. Although the apprentice-tutor model has long been a successful approach for training of surgeons, recently, clinicians have recognised that endoscopic surgery requires an important training phase outside the operating theatre. The Gynaecological Endoscopic Surgical Education and Assessment programme (GESEA) recognises the necessity of this structured approach and implements two separated stages in its learning strategy. In the first stage, a skill certificate on theoretical knowledge and specific practical psychomotor skills is acquired through a high-stake exam; in the second stage, a clinical programme is completed to achieve surgical competence and receive the corresponding diploma. Three diplomas can be awarded: (a) the Bachelor in Endoscopy, (b) the Minimally Invasive Gynaecological Surgeon (MIGS) and (c) the Master level. The Master level is sub-divided into two separate diplomas: the Master in Laparoscopic Pelvic Surgery and the Master in Hysteroscopy. The complexity of modern surgery has increased the demands and challenges to surgical education and the quality control. This programme is based on the best available scientific evidence, and it counteracts the problem of the traditional surgical apprentice-tutor model. It is seen as a major step toward standardisation of endoscopic surgical training in general.

Gynaecological Endoscopic Surgical Education and Assessment. A diploma programme in gynaecological endoscopic surgery

In recent years, training and education in endoscopic surgery has been critically reviewed. Clinicians, both surgeons as gynaecologist who perform endoscopic surgery without proper training of the specific psychomotor skills are at higher risk to increased patient morbidity and mortality. Although the apprentice-tutor model has long been a successful approach for training of surgeons, recently, clinicians have recognised that endoscopic surgery requires an important training phase outside the operating theatre. The Gynaecological Endoscopic Surgical Education and Assessment programme (GESEA), recognises the necessity of this structured approach and implements two separated stages in its learning strategy. In the first stage, a skill certificate on theoretical knowledge and specific practical psychomotor skills is acquired through a high stake exam; in the second stage, a clinical programme is completed to achieve surgical competence and receive the corresponding diploma. Three diplomas can be awarded: (a) the Bachelor in Endoscopy; (b) the Minimally Invasive Gynaecological Surgeon (MIGS); and (c) the Master level. The Master level is sub-divided into two separate diplomas: the Master in Laparoscopic Pelvic Surgery and the Master in Hysteroscopy. The complexity of modern surgery has increased the demands and challenges to surgical education and the quality control. This programme is based on the best available scientific evidence and it counteracts the problem of the traditional surgical apprentice tutor model. It is seen as a major step toward standardization of endoscopic surgical training in general.

Mastery learning for health professionals using technology-enhanced simulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Competency-based education requires individualization of instruction. Mastery learning, an instructional approach requiring learners to achieve a defined proficiency before proceeding to the next instructional objective, offers one approach to individualization. The authors sought to summarize the quantitative outcomes of mastery learning simulation-based medical education (SBME) in comparison with no intervention and nonmastery instruction, and to determine what features of mastery SBME make it effective.

METHOD

The authors searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO, Scopus, key journals, and previous review bibliographies through May 2011. They included original research in any language evaluating mastery SBME, in comparison with any intervention or no intervention, for practicing and student physicians, nurses, and other health professionals. Working in duplicate, they abstracted information on trainees, instructional design (interactivity, feedback, repetitions, and learning time), study design, and outcomes.

RESULTS

They identified 82 studies evaluating mastery SBME. In comparison with no intervention, mastery SBME was associated with large effects on skills (41 studies; effect size [ES] 1.29 [95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.50]) and moderate effects on patient outcomes (11 studies; ES 0.73 [95% CI, 0.36-1.10]). In comparison with nonmastery SBME instruction, mastery learning was associated with large benefit in skills (3 studies; effect size 1.17 [95% CI, 0.29-2.05]) but required more time. Pretraining and additional practice improved outcomes but, again, took longer. Studies exploring enhanced feedback and self-regulated learning in the mastery model showed mixed results.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited evidence suggests that mastery learning SBME is superior to nonmastery instruction but takes more time.

State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Summarize the outcomes and best practices of simulation training for laparoscopic surgery.

BACKGROUND

Simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery has become a mainstay of surgical training. Much new evidence has accrued since previous reviews were published.

METHODS

We systematically searched the literature through May 2011 for studies evaluating simulation, in comparison with no intervention or an alternate training activity, for training health professionals in laparoscopic surgery. Outcomes were classified as satisfaction, skills (in a test setting) of time (to perform the task), process (eg, performance rating), product (eg, knot strength), and behaviors when caring for patients. We used random effects to pool effect sizes.

RESULTS

From 10,903 articles screened, we identified 219 eligible studies enrolling 7138 trainees, including 91 (42%) randomized trials. For comparisons with no intervention (n = 151 studies), pooled effect size (ES) favored simulation for outcomes of knowledge (1.18; N = 9 studies), skills time (1.13; N = 89), skills process (1.23; N = 114), skills product (1.09; N = 7), behavior time (1.15; N = 7), behavior process (1.22; N = 15), and patient effects (1.28; N = 1), all P < 0.05. When compared with nonsimulation instruction (n = 3 studies), results significantly favored simulation for outcomes of skills time (ES, 0.75) and skills process (ES, 0.54). Comparisons between different simulation interventions (n = 79 studies) clarified best practices. For example, in comparison with virtual reality, box trainers have similar effects for process skills outcomes and seem to be superior for outcomes of satisfaction and skills time.

CONCLUSIONS

Simulation-based laparoscopic surgery training of health professionals has large benefits when compared with no intervention and is moderately more effective than nonsimulation instruction.