Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study

Neal E Seymour, Anthony G Gallagher, Sanziana A Roman, Michael K O'Brien, Vipin K Bansal, Dana K Andersen, Richard M Satava, Neal E Seymour, Anthony G Gallagher, Sanziana A Roman, Michael K O'Brien, Vipin K Bansal, Dana K Andersen, Richard M Satava

Abstract

Objective: To demonstrate that virtual reality (VR) training transfers technical skills to the operating room (OR) environment.

Summary background data: The use of VR surgical simulation to train skills and reduce error risk in the OR has never been demonstrated in a prospective, randomized, blinded study.

Methods: Sixteen surgical residents (PGY 1-4) had baseline psychomotor abilities assessed, then were randomized to either VR training (MIST VR simulator diathermy task) until expert criterion levels established by experienced laparoscopists were achieved (n = 8), or control non-VR-trained (n = 8). All subjects performed laparoscopic cholecystectomy with an attending surgeon blinded to training status. Videotapes of gallbladder dissection were reviewed independently by two investigators blinded to subject identity and training, and scored for eight predefined errors for each procedure minute (interrater reliability of error assessment r > 0.80).

Results: No differences in baseline assessments were found between groups. Gallbladder dissection was 29% faster for VR-trained residents. Non-VR-trained residents were nine times more likely to transiently fail to make progress (P <.007, Mann-Whitney test) and five times more likely to injure the gallbladder or burn nontarget tissue (chi-square = 4.27, P <.04). Mean errors were six times less likely to occur in the VR-trained group (1.19 vs. 7.38 errors per case; P <.008, Mann-Whitney test).

Conclusions: The use of VR surgical simulation to reach specific target criteria significantly improved the OR performance of residents during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This validation of transfer of training skills from VR to OR sets the stage for more sophisticated uses of VR in assessment, training, error reduction, and certification of surgeons.

Figures

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/1422600/bin/8FF1.jpg
Figure 1. MIST VR screen appearance on “Manipulate and Diathermy” task. The sphere, which must be precisely positioned within a virtual cube, presents a target for the L-hook electrosurgery instrument. Objects may be positioned anywhere within the defined operating space.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/1422600/bin/8FF2.jpg
Fig. 2. Results of fundamental abilities assessment. No significant differences were noted in visuospatial, perceptual, or psychomotor abilities between subjects randomized to ST and VR groups when assessed before the training phase of the study.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/1422600/bin/8FF3.jpg
Figure 3. Mean duration of operative procedure for the VR and ST groups.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/1422600/bin/8FF4.jpg
Figure 4. Total error number for each error type. LOP, lack of progress; GBI, gallbladder injury; LI, liver injury; intraperitoneal, incorrect plane of dissection; BNT, burn nontarget tissue; TT, tearing tissue; IOV, instrument out of view; AT, attending takeover. In all error categories except LI and TT, a greater number of errors were observed in the ST group than in the VR group.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/1422600/bin/8FF5.jpg
Figure 5. Total number of errors scored per procedure for VR and ST groups. The mean number of errors per procedure was significantly greater in the ST group than in the VR group (P < .006).

References

    1. Deziel D, Milikan KW, Economou SG, et al. Complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A national survey of 4,292 hospitals and an analysis of 77,604 cases. Am J Surg 1993; 165: 9–14.
    1. The Southern Surgeons Club. The learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 1995; 170: 55–59.
    1. Wherry DC, Rob CG, Marohn MR, et al. An external audit of laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed in medical treatment facilities of the Department of Defense. Ann Surg 1994; 220: 626–634.
    1. Senate of Surgery. Response to the General Medical Council Determination on the Bristol Case. London: Senate Paper 5, The Senate of Surgery of Great Britain and Ireland, 1998.
    1. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson M. To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, 1999.
    1. Satava RM. Virtual reality surgical simulator: The first steps. Surg Endosc 1993; 7: 203–205.
    1. Gallagher AG, McClure N, McGuigan J, et al. Virtual reality training in laparoscopic surgery: A preliminary assessment of Minimally Invasive Surgical Trainer Virtual Reality (MIST VR). Endoscopy 1999; 31: 310–313.
    1. Jordan JA, Gallagher AG, McGuigan J, et al. A comparison between random randomly alternating imaging, normal laparoscopic imaging and virtual reality training in laparoscopic psychomotor skill acquisition. Am J Surg 2000; 180: 208–211.
    1. Gallagher AG, McGuigan J, Ritchie K, et al. Objective psychomotor assessment of senior, junior and novice laparoscopists with virtual reality. World J Surg 2001; 25: 1478–1483.
    1. Rosser JC, Rosser LE, Savalgi RS. Skill acquisition and assessment for laparoscopic surgery. Arch Surg 1997; 132: 200–204.
    1. Rosser, JC, Rosser, LE, Savalgi RS. Objective evaluation of laparoscopic surgical skill program for residents and senior surgeons. Arch Surg 1998; 133: 657–661.
    1. Ekstrom RB, French JW, Harman HH, et al. Manual for Kit of Factor-Referenced Cognitive Tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service; 1976.
    1. Cowie R. Measurement and modelling of perceived slant in surfaces represented by freely viewed line drawings. Perception 1998; 27: 505–540.
    1. Martin P, Bateson P. Measuring Behaviour: An Introductory Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
    1. Kazdin AE. Behavior Modification in Applied Dettings. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., 1998.
    1. Eubanks TR, Clements RH, Pohl D, et al. An objective scoring system for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 1991; 566–574.

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe