Procedural specificity in laparoscopic simulator training: protocol for a randomised educational superiority trial

Flemming Bjerrum, Jette Led Sorensen, Lars Konge, Jane Lindschou, Susanne Rosthøj, Bent Ottesen, Jeanett Strandbygaard, Flemming Bjerrum, Jette Led Sorensen, Lars Konge, Jane Lindschou, Susanne Rosthøj, Bent Ottesen, Jeanett Strandbygaard

Abstract

Background: The use of structured curricula for minimally invasive surgery training is becoming increasingly popular. However, many laparoscopic training programs still use basic skills and isolated task training, despite increasing evidence to support the use of training models with higher functional resemblance, such as whole procedural modules. In contrast to basic skills training, procedural training involves several cognitive skills such as elements of planning, movement integration, and how to avoid adverse events. The objective of this trial is to investigate the specificity of procedural practice in laparoscopic simulator training.

Methods/design: A randomised single-centre educational superiority trial. Participants are 96 surgical novices (medical students) without prior laparoscopic experience. Participants start by practicing a series of basic skills tasks to a predefined proficiency level on a virtual reality laparoscopy simulator. Upon reaching proficiency, the participants are randomised to either the intervention group, which practices two procedures (an appendectomy followed by a salpingectomy) or to the control group, practicing only one procedure (a salpingectomy) on the simulator. 1:1 central randomisation is used and participants are stratified by sex and time to complete the basic skills. Data collection is done at a surgical skills centre.The primary outcome is the number of repetitions required to reach a predefined proficiency level on the salpingectomy module. The secondary outcome is the total training time to proficiency. The improvement in motor skills and effect on cognitive load are also explored.

Discussion: The results of this trial might provide new knowledge on how the technical part of surgical training curricula should be comprised in the future. To examine the specificity of practice in procedural simulator training is of great importance in order to develop more comprehensive surgical curricula.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02069951.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Participant flowchart in accordance with the CONSORT statement.

References

    1. Strandbygaard J, Bjerrum F, Maagaard M, Rifbjerg Larsen C, Ottesen B, Sorensen JL. A structured four-step curriculum in basic laparoscopy: development and validation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014;93:359–366. doi: 10.1111/aogs.12330.
    1. Reznick RK, Macrae H. Teaching surgical skills–changes in the wind. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:2664–2669. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra054785.
    1. Grantcharov TP, Reznick RK. Teaching procedural skills. BMJ. 2008;336:1129–1131. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39517.686956.47.
    1. Våpenstad C, Buzink SN. Procedural virtual reality simulation in minimally invasive surgery. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:364–377. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2503-1.
    1. Schreuder HWR, van Hove PD, Janse JA, Verheijen RRM, Stassen LPS, Dankelman J. An “intermediate curriculum” for advanced laparoscopic skills training with virtual reality simulation. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011;18:597–606. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2011.05.017.
    1. Kolozsvari NO, Kaneva P, Brace C, Chartrand G, Vaillancourt M, Cao J, Banaszek D, Demyttenaere S, Vassiliou MC, Fried GM, Feldman LS. Mastery versus the standard proficiency target for basic laparoscopic skill training: effect on skill transfer and retention. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:2063–2070. doi: 10.1007/s00464-011-1743-9.
    1. Sabbagh R, Chatterjee S, Chawla A, Kapoor A, Matsumoto ED. Task-specific bench model training versus basic laparoscopic skills training for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a randomized controlled study. Can Urol Assoc J. 2009;3:22–30.
    1. Lucas SM, Zeltser IS, Bensalah K, Tuncel A, Jenkins A, Pearle MS, Cadeddu JA. Training on a virtual reality laparoscopic simulator improves performance of an unfamiliar live laparoscopic procedure. J Urol. 2008;180:2588–2591. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.08.041.
    1. Jensen K, Ringsted C, Hansen HJ, Petersen RH, Konge L. Simulation-based training for thoracoscopic lobectomy: a randomized controlled trial: virtual-reality versus black-box simulation. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:1821–1829. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3392-7.
    1. Strandbygaard J, Bjerrum F, Maagaard M, Winkel P, Larsen CR, Ringsted C, Gluud C, Grantcharov T, Ottesen B, Sorensen JL. Instructor feedback versus no instructor feedback on performance in a laparoscopic virtual reality simulator: a randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2013;257:839–844. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31827eee6e.
    1. Larsen CR, Soerensen JL, Grantcharov TP, Dalsgaard T, Schouenborg L, Ottosen C, Schroeder TV, Ottesen BS. Effect of virtual reality training on laparoscopic surgery: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2009;338:b1802. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b1802.
    1. Zijlstra F. Efficiency in Work Behaviour: A Design Approach for Modern Tools. Netherlands: Delft University of Technology; 1993. PhD thesis.
    1. van der Schatte Olivier RH, Van't Hullenaar CDP, Ruurda JP, Broeders IAMJ. Ergonomics, user comfort, and performance in standard and robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:1365–1371. doi: 10.1007/s00464-008-0184-6.
    1. Bharathan R, Vali S, Setchell T, Miskry T, Darzi A, Aggarwal R. Psychomotor skills and cognitive load training on a virtual reality laparoscopic simulator for tubal surgery is effective. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013;169:347–352. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.03.017.
    1. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Med. 2010;8:18. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-8-18.
    1. Atkinson A, Riani MA. Robust Diagnostic Regression Analysis. New York, NY: Springer; 2000.
    1. Efron B, Tibshirani R. An Introduction to the Bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall; 1993.
    1. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J Royal Stat Soc Ser. 1995;57:289–300.
    1. Hiemstra E, Kolkman W, Jansen FW. Skills training in minimally invasive surgery in Dutch obstetrics and gynecology residency curriculum. Gynecol Surg. 2008;5:321–325. doi: 10.1007/s10397-008-0402-1.
    1. Schreuder H, van den Berg C, Hazebroek E, Verheijen R, Schijven M. Laparoscopic skills training using inexpensive box trainers: which exercises to choose when constructing a validated training course. BJOG. 2011;119:263–265.
    1. Magill R, Anderson D. Motor Learning and Control: Concepts and Applications. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education; 2013.
    1. Ericsson KA. The Influence of Experience and Deliberate Practice on the Development of Superior Expert Performance. In: Ericsson KA, Charness N, Feltovich PJ, Hoffman RR, editors. The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006. pp. 683–704.
    1. Ericsson KA. Deliberate practice and the acquisition and maintenance of expert performance in medicine and related domains. Acad Med. 2004;79:S70–81. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200410001-00022.
    1. Hamstra SJ, Brydges R, Hatala R, Zendejas B, Cook DA. Reconsidering fidelity in simulation-based training. Acad Med. 2014;89:387–392. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000130.
    1. Sabbagh R, Chatterjee S, Chawla A, Hoogenes J, Kapoor A, Matsumoto ED. Transfer of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy skills from bench model to animal model: a prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled study. J Urol. 2012;187:1861–1866. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.12.050.
    1. O'keeffe SL, Harrison AJ, Smyth PJ. Transfer or specificity? An applied investigation into the relationship between fundamental overarm throwing and related sport skills. Phys Educ Sport Pedagog. 2007;12:89–102. doi: 10.1080/17408980701281995.
    1. Moradi J, Movahedi A, Salehi H. Specificity of learning a sport skill to the visual condition of acquisition. J Mot Behav. 2014;46:17–23. doi: 10.1080/00222895.2013.838935.
    1. Young JQ, Van Merrienboer J, Durning S, Ten Cate O. Cognitive Load Theory: Implications for medical education: AMEE Guide No. 86. Med Teach. 2014;36:371–384. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.889290.
    1. Spruit EN, Band GPH, Hamming JF, Ridderinkhof KR. Psychol Res. 2013. Optimal training design for procedural motor skills: a review and application to laparoscopic surgery.
    1. Savović J, Jones HE, Altman DG, Harris RJ, Jüni P, Pildal J, Als-Nielsen B, Balk EM, Gluud C, Gluud LL, Ioannidis JPA, Schulz KF, Beynon R, Welton NJ, Wood L, Moher D, Deeks JJ, Sterne JAC. Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157:429–438. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-6-201209180-00537.
    1. Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, Schulz KF, Jüni P, Altman DG, Gluud C, Martin RM, Wood AJG, Sterne JAC. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ. 2008;336:601–605. doi: 10.1136/.
    1. Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C. Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135:982–989. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-135-11-200112040-00010.
    1. Cook DA, West CP. Perspective: Reconsidering the focus on “outcomes research” in medical education: a cautionary note. Acad Med. 2013;88:162–167. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31827c3d78.
Pre-publication history
    1. The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel