Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Urology 1/2017

01-01-2017 | Original Article

Structured learning for robotic surgery utilizing a proficiency score: a pilot study

Authors: Andrew J. Hung, Thomas Bottyan, Thomas G. Clifford, Sarfaraz Serang, Zein K. Nakhoda, Swar H. Shah, Hana Yokoi, Monish Aron, Inderbir S. Gill

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

We evaluated feasibility and benefit of implementing structured learning in a robotics program. Furthermore, we assessed validity of a proficiency assessment tool for stepwise graduation.

Methods

Teaching cases included robotic radical prostatectomy and partial nephrectomy. Procedure steps were categorized: basic, intermediate, and advanced. An assessment tool [“proficiency score” (PS)] was developed to evaluate ability to safely and autonomously complete a step. Graduation required a passing PS (PS ≥ 3) on three consecutive attempts. PS and validated global evaluative assessment of robotic skills (GEARS) were evaluated for completed steps. Linear regression was utilized to determine postgraduate year/PS relationship (construct validity). Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient measured correlation between PS and GEARS evaluations (concurrent validity). Intraclass correlation (ICC) evaluated PS agreement between evaluator classes.

Results

Twenty-one robotic trainees participated within the pilot program, completing a median of 14 (2–69) cases each. Twenty-three study evaluators scored 14 (1–60) cases. Over 4 months, 229/294 (78 %) cases were designated “teaching” cases. Residents completed 91 % of possible evaluations; faculty completed 78 %. Verbal and quantitative feedback received by trainees increased significantly (p = 0.002, p < 0.001, respectively). Average PS increased with PGY (post-graduate year) for basic and intermediate steps (regression slopes: 0.402 (p < 0.0001), 0.323 (p < 0.0001), respectively) (construct validation). Overall, PS correlated highly with GEARS (ρ = 0.81, p < 0.0001) (concurrent validity). ICC was 0.77 (95 % CI 0.61–0.88) for resident evaluations.

Conclusion

Structured learning can be implemented in an academic robotic program with high levels of trainee and evaluator participation, encouraging both quantitative and verbal feedback. A proficiency assessment tool developed for step-specific proficiency has construct and concurrent validity.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Fisher RA, Dasgupta P, Mottrie A et al (2015) An over-view of robot assisted surgery curricula and the status of their validation. Int J Surg 13:115–123CrossRefPubMed Fisher RA, Dasgupta P, Mottrie A et al (2015) An over-view of robot assisted surgery curricula and the status of their validation. Int J Surg 13:115–123CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Herron DM, Marohn M, Group S-MRSC (2008) A consensus document on robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 22:313–25; discussion 1-2 Herron DM, Marohn M, Group S-MRSC (2008) A consensus document on robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 22:313–25; discussion 1-2
3.
go back to reference Ahmed K, Khan R, Mottrie A et al (2015) Development of a standardised training curriculum for robotic surgery: a consensus statement from an international multidisciplinary group of experts. BJU Int 116:93–101CrossRefPubMed Ahmed K, Khan R, Mottrie A et al (2015) Development of a standardised training curriculum for robotic surgery: a consensus statement from an international multidisciplinary group of experts. BJU Int 116:93–101CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Lee JY, Mucksavage P, Sundaram CP, McDougall EM (2011) Best practices for robotic surgery training and credentialing. J Urol 185:1191–1197CrossRefPubMed Lee JY, Mucksavage P, Sundaram CP, McDougall EM (2011) Best practices for robotic surgery training and credentialing. J Urol 185:1191–1197CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Volpe A, Ahmed K, Dasgupta P et al (2015) Pilot Validation study of the European Association of Urology robotic training curriculum. Eur Urol 68:292–299CrossRefPubMed Volpe A, Ahmed K, Dasgupta P et al (2015) Pilot Validation study of the European Association of Urology robotic training curriculum. Eur Urol 68:292–299CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Ali MR, Rasmussen J, BhaskerRao B (2007) Teaching robotic surgery: a stepwise approach. Surg Endosc 21:912–915CrossRefPubMed Ali MR, Rasmussen J, BhaskerRao B (2007) Teaching robotic surgery: a stepwise approach. Surg Endosc 21:912–915CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Mirheydar H, Jones M, Koeneman KS, Sweet RM (2009) Robotic surgical education: a collaborative approach to training postgraduate urologists and endourology fellows. JSLS J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 13:287–292 Mirheydar H, Jones M, Koeneman KS, Sweet RM (2009) Robotic surgical education: a collaborative approach to training postgraduate urologists and endourology fellows. JSLS J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 13:287–292
8.
go back to reference Schachner T, Bonaros N, Wiedemann D et al (2009) Training surgeons to perform robotically assisted totally endoscopic coronary surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 88:523–527CrossRefPubMed Schachner T, Bonaros N, Wiedemann D et al (2009) Training surgeons to perform robotically assisted totally endoscopic coronary surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 88:523–527CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Schroeck FR, de Sousa CA, Kalman RA et al (2008) Trainees do not negatively impact the institutional learning curve for robotic prostatectomy as characterized by operative time, estimated blood loss, and positive surgical margin rate. Urology 71:597–601CrossRefPubMed Schroeck FR, de Sousa CA, Kalman RA et al (2008) Trainees do not negatively impact the institutional learning curve for robotic prostatectomy as characterized by operative time, estimated blood loss, and positive surgical margin rate. Urology 71:597–601CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Aggarwal R, Grantcharov TP, Darzi A (2007) Framework for systematic training and assessment of technical skills. J Am Coll Surg 204:697–705CrossRefPubMed Aggarwal R, Grantcharov TP, Darzi A (2007) Framework for systematic training and assessment of technical skills. J Am Coll Surg 204:697–705CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Kloek CE, Borboli-Gerogiannis S, Chang K et al (2014) A broadly applicable surgical teaching method: evaluation of a stepwise introduction to cataract surgery. J Surg Educ 71:169–175CrossRefPubMed Kloek CE, Borboli-Gerogiannis S, Chang K et al (2014) A broadly applicable surgical teaching method: evaluation of a stepwise introduction to cataract surgery. J Surg Educ 71:169–175CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Rashid HH, Leung YY, Rashid MJ, Oleyourryk G, Valvo JR, Eichel L (2006) Robotic surgical education: a systematic approach to training urology residents to perform robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urology 68:75–79CrossRefPubMed Rashid HH, Leung YY, Rashid MJ, Oleyourryk G, Valvo JR, Eichel L (2006) Robotic surgical education: a systematic approach to training urology residents to perform robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urology 68:75–79CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Stolzenburg JU, Schwaibold H, Bhanot SM et al (2005) Modular surgical training for endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 96:1022–1027CrossRefPubMed Stolzenburg JU, Schwaibold H, Bhanot SM et al (2005) Modular surgical training for endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 96:1022–1027CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Aghazadeh MA, Jayaratna IS, Hung AJ et al (2015) External validation of global evaluative assessment of robotic skills (GEARS). Surg Endosc 29:3261–3266CrossRefPubMed Aghazadeh MA, Jayaratna IS, Hung AJ et al (2015) External validation of global evaluative assessment of robotic skills (GEARS). Surg Endosc 29:3261–3266CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Goh AC, Goldfarb DW, Sander JC, Miles BJ, Dunkin BJ (2012) Global evaluative assessment of robotic skills: validation of a clinical assessment tool to measure robotic surgical skills. J Urol 187:247–252CrossRefPubMed Goh AC, Goldfarb DW, Sander JC, Miles BJ, Dunkin BJ (2012) Global evaluative assessment of robotic skills: validation of a clinical assessment tool to measure robotic surgical skills. J Urol 187:247–252CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Williams PL, Webb C (1994) The Delphi technique: a methodological discussion. J Adv Nurs 19:180–186CrossRefPubMed Williams PL, Webb C (1994) The Delphi technique: a methodological discussion. J Adv Nurs 19:180–186CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Holst D, Kowalewski TM, White LW et al (2015) Crowd-sourced assessment of technical skills (C-SATS): differentiating animate surgical skill through the wisdom of crowds. J Endourol 29:1183–1188CrossRefPubMed Holst D, Kowalewski TM, White LW et al (2015) Crowd-sourced assessment of technical skills (C-SATS): differentiating animate surgical skill through the wisdom of crowds. J Endourol 29:1183–1188CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Structured learning for robotic surgery utilizing a proficiency score: a pilot study
Authors
Andrew J. Hung
Thomas Bottyan
Thomas G. Clifford
Sarfaraz Serang
Zein K. Nakhoda
Swar H. Shah
Hana Yokoi
Monish Aron
Inderbir S. Gill
Publication date
01-01-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
World Journal of Urology / Issue 1/2017
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1833-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

World Journal of Urology 1/2017 Go to the issue