Effect of virtual reality training on laparoscopic surgery: randomised controlled trial

Christian R Larsen, Jette L Soerensen, Teodor P Grantcharov, Torur Dalsgaard, Lars Schouenborg, Christian Ottosen, Torben V Schroeder, Bent S Ottesen, Christian R Larsen, Jette L Soerensen, Teodor P Grantcharov, Torur Dalsgaard, Lars Schouenborg, Christian Ottosen, Torben V Schroeder, Bent S Ottesen

Abstract

Objective: To assess the effect of virtual reality training on an actual laparoscopic operation.

Design: Prospective randomised controlled and blinded trial.

Setting: Seven gynaecological departments in the Zeeland region of Denmark.

Participants: 24 first and second year registrars specialising in gynaecology and obstetrics.

Interventions: Proficiency based virtual reality simulator training in laparoscopic salpingectomy and standard clinical education (controls).

Main outcome measure: The main outcome measure was technical performance assessed by two independent observers blinded to trainee and training status using a previously validated general and task specific rating scale. The secondary outcome measure was operation time in minutes.

Results: The simulator trained group (n=11) reached a median total score of 33 points (interquartile range 32-36 points), equivalent to the experience gained after 20-50 laparoscopic procedures, whereas the control group (n=10) reached a median total score of 23 (22-27) points, equivalent to the experience gained from fewer than five procedures (P<0.001). The median total operation time in the simulator trained group was 12 minutes (interquartile range 10-14 minutes) and in the control group was 24 (20-29) minutes (P<0.001). The observers' inter-rater agreement was 0.79.

Conclusion: Skills in laparoscopic surgery can be increased in a clinically relevant manner using proficiency based virtual reality simulator training. The performance level of novices was increased to that of intermediately experienced laparoscopists and operation time was halved. Simulator training should be considered before trainees carry out laparoscopic procedures.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00311792.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/4817735/bin/larc577908.f1_default.jpg
Flow of trainees through trial

References

    1. Bruhat MA, Pouly JL. Endoscopic treatment of ectopic pregnancies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 1993;5:260-6.
    1. Keus F, Broeders IA, van Laarhoven CJ. Gallstone disease: surgical aspects of symptomatic cholecystolithiasis and acute cholecystitis. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2006;20:1031-51.
    1. Rosenmuller M, Haapamaki MM, Nordin P, Stenlund H, Nilsson E. Cholecystectomy in Sweden 2000-2003: a nationwide study on procedures, patient characteristics, and mortality. BMC Gastroenterol 2007;7:35.
    1. Peters JD. Cutting the legal risks of laparoscopy. OBG Management 2002;14(10):47-55.
    1. Karvonen J, Gullichsen R, Laine S, Salminen P, Gronroos JM. Bile duct injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: primary and long-term results from a single institution. Surg Endosc 2007;21:1069-73.
    1. Avital S, Hermon H, Greenberg R, Karin E, Skornick Y. Learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: our first 100 patients. Isr Med Assoc J 2006;8:683-6.
    1. Kumar U, Gill IS. Learning curve in human laparoscopic surgery. Curr Urol Rep 2006;7:120-4.
    1. Eto M, Harano M, Koga H, Tanaka M, Naito S. Clinical outcomes and learning curve of a laparoscopic adrenalectomy in 103 consecutive cases at a single institute. Int J Urol 2006;13:671-6.
    1. Adibe OO, Nichol PF, Flake AW, Mattei P. Comparison of outcomes after laparoscopic and open pyloromyotomy at a high-volume pediatric teaching hospital. J Pediatr Surg 2006;41:1676-8.
    1. Fleisch MC, Newton J, Steinmetz I, Whitehair J, Hallum A, Hatch KD. Learning and teaching advanced laparoscopic procedures: do alternating trainees impair a laparoscopic surgeon’s learning curve? J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2007;14:293-9.
    1. Carlsson S, Nilsson A, Wiklund PN. Postoperative urinary continence after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2006;40:103-7.
    1. Grantcharov TP, Reznick RK. Teaching procedural skills. BMJ 2008;336:1129-31.
    1. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee GD, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach 2005;27:10-28.
    1. Sutherland LM, Middleton PF, Anthony A, Hamdorf J, Cregan P, Scott D, et al. Surgical simulation: a systematic review. Ann Surg 2006;243:291-300.
    1. Larsen CR, Grantcharov T, Aggarwal R, Tully A, Sorensen JL, Dalsgaard T, et al. Objective assessment of gynecologic laparoscopic skills using the LapSimGyn virtual reality simulator. Surg Endosc 2006;20:1460-6.
    1. Aggarwal R, Tully A, Grantcharov T, Larsen CR, Miskry T, Farthing A, et al. Virtual reality simulation training can improve technical skills during laparoscopic salpingectomy for ectopic pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2006;113:1382-7.
    1. Nezhat C, Siegler A, Nezhat N, Nezhat Ce, Seidman D, Luciano A. Operations on the fallopian tube. Operative gynecologic laparoscopy: principles and techniques. San Franscisco: McGraw-Hill, 2000:246-51.
    1. Garry R. Laparoscopic surgery. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2006;20:89-104.
    1. Larsen CR, Grantcharov TP, Schouenborg L, Soerensen JL, Ottosen C, Ottesen BS. Objective assessment of surgical competence in gynaecological laparoscopy: development and validation of a procedure specific rating scale. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2008;115:908-16.
    1. Southern Surgeons Club. A prospective analysis of 1518 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. The Southern Surgeons Club. N Engl J Med 1991;324:1073-8.
    1. Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D, et al. Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. BMJ 2000;321:694-6.
    1. Bridges M, Diamond DL. The financial impact of teaching surgical residents in the operating room. Am J Surg 1999;177:28-32.
    1. Grantcharov TP, Kristiansen VB, Bendix J, Bardram L, Rosenberg J, Funch-Jensen P. Randomized clinical trial of virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic skills training. Br J Surg 2004;91:146-50.
    1. Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, O’Brien MK, Bansal VK, Andersen DK, et al. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg 2002;236:458-63.
    1. Ahlberg G, Heikkinen T, Iselius L, Leijonmarck CE, Rutqvist J, Arvidsson D. Does training in a virtual reality simulator improve surgical performance? Surg Endosc 2002;16:126-9.
    1. Ahlberg G, Enochsson L, Gallagher AG, Hedman L, Hogman C, McClusky DA III, et al. Proficiency-based virtual reality training significantly reduces the error rate for residents during their first 10 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Am J Surg 2007;193:797-804.
    1. Kneebone RL, Nestel D, Chrzanowska J, Barnet AE, Darzi A. Innovative training for new surgical roles—the place of evaluation. Med Educ 2006;40:987-94.
    1. Moorthy K, Munz Y, Sarker SK, Darzi A. Objective assessment of technical skills in surgery. BMJ 2003;327:1032-7.
    1. Lingard L, Reznick R, DeVito I, Espin S. Forming professional identities on the health care team: discursive constructions of the ‘other’ in the operating room. Med Educ 2002;36:728-34.
    1. Kneebone R. Simulation in surgical training: educational issues and practical implications. Med Educ 2003;37:267-77.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbejdspartnere

Medicinske tilstande

Narkotikainterventioner

3
Abonner