Evaluating Non-operative Robotic Skills in Colorectal Surgical Training

Use of Simulation For Training Advanced Colorectal Procedures

OBJECTIVE

Simulation training for minimally invasive colorectal procedures is in developing stages. This study aims to assess the impact of simulation on procedural knowledge and simulated performance in laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR) and robotic right colectomy (RRC).

DESIGN

LLAR and RRC simulation procedures were designed using human cadaveric models. Resident case experience and simulation selfassessments scores for operative ability and knowledge were collected before and after the simulation. Colorectal faculty assessed resident simulation performance using validated assessment scales (OSATS-GRS, GEARS). Paired t-tests, unpaired t-tests, Pearson's correlation, and descriptive statistics were applied in analyses.

SETTING

Barnes-Jewish Hospital/Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Missouri.

PARTICIPANTS

Senior general surgery residents at large academic surgery program.

RESULTS

Fifteen PGY4/PGY5 general surgery residents participated in each simulation. Mean LLAR knowledge score increased overall from 10.0 ±  2.0 to 11.5  ±  1.6 of 15 points (p = 0.0018); when stratified, this increase remained significant for the PGY4 cohort only. Mean confidence in ability to complete LLAR increased overall from 2.0 ±  0.8 to 2.8  ± 0.9 on a 5-point rating scale (p = 0.0013); when stratified, this increase remained significant for the PGY4 cohort only. Mean total OSATS GRS score was 28  ±  6.3 of 35 and had strong positive correlation with previous laparoscopic colorectal experience (r = 0.64, p = 0.0092). Mean RRC knowledge score increased from 9.4 ±  2.2 to 11.1 ±  1.5 of 15 points (p = 0.0030); when stratified, this increase again remained significant for the PGY4 cohort only. Mean confidence in ability to complete RRC increased from 1.9 ±  0.9 to 3.2  ±  1.1 (p = 0.0002) and was significant for both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical trainees require opportunities to practice advanced minimally invasive colorectal procedures. Our simulation approach promotes increased procedural knowledge and resident confidence and offers a safe complement to live operative experience for trainee development. In the future, simulations will target trainees on the earlier part of the learning curve and be paired with live operative assessments to characterize longitudinal skill progression.

Assessment and application of non-technical skills in robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Undeniably, robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has become very popular in recent decades, but it has introduced challenges to the workflow of the surgical team. Non-technical skills (NTS) have received less emphasis than technical skills in training and assessment. The systematic review aimed to update the evidence on the role of NTS in robotic surgery, specifically focusing on evaluating assessment tools and their utilisation in training and surgical education in robotic surgery.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of PubMed, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and EMBASE was conducted to identify primary articles on NTS in RAS. Messick's validity framework and the Modified Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument were utilised to evaluate the quality of the validity evidence of the abstracted articles.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were eligible for the final analysis. Communication, environmental factors, anticipation and teamwork were key NTS for RAS. Team-related factors such as ambient noise and chatter, inconveniences due to repeated requests during the procedure and constraints due to poor design of the operating room may harm patient safety during RAS. Three novel rater-based scoring systems and one sensor-based method for assessing NTS in RAS were identified. Anticipation by the team to predict and execute the next move before an explicit verbal command improved the surgeon's situational awareness.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review highlighted the paucity of reporting on non-technical skills in robotic surgery with only three bespoke objective assessment tools being identified. Communication, environmental factors, anticipation, and teamwork are the key non-technical skills reported in robotic surgery, and further research is required to investigate their benefits to improve patient safety during robotic surgery.

The current status of robotic colorectal surgery training programmes

Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS) is steadily increasing in popularity with an annual growth in the number of colorectal procedures undertaken robotically. Further upscaling of RACS requires structured and standardised robotic training to safeguard high-quality clinical outcomes. The aims of this systematic review were to assess the structure and assessment metrics of currently established RACS training programmes. A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines was performed. Searches were performed of the Ovid Medline, Embase and Web of Science databases between 2000 and 27th November 2021 to identify studies reporting on training curricula in RACS. Core components of training programmes and their relevant outcome assessment metrics were extracted. Thirteen studies were identified, with all training programmes designed for the da Vinci platform (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Common elements of multimodal programmes included theoretical knowledge (76.9%), case observation (53.8%), simulation (100%) and proctored training (76.9%). Robotic skills acquisition was assessed primarily during the simulation phase (n = 4, 30.1%) and proctoring phase (n = 10, 76.9%). Performance metrics, consisting of time or assessment scores for VR simulation were only mandated in four (30.1%) studies. Objective assessment following proctored training was variably reported and employed a range of assessment metrics, including direct feedback (n = 3, 23.1%) or video feedback (n = 8, 61.5%). Five (38.4%) training programmes used the Global Assessment Score (GAS) forms. There is a broad consensus on the core multimodal components across current RACS training programmes; however, validated objective assessment is limited and needs to be appropriately standardised to ensure reproducible progression criteria and competency-based metrics are produced to robustly assess progression and competence.