Abstract
Introduction
Currently, no prerequisite teaching qualification is required to serve as faculty for SAGES hands-on courses (SAGES-HOC). The Lapco-Train-the-Trainers (Lapco-TT) is a course for surgical trainers, in which delegates learn a standardized teaching technique for skills acquisition. The aims of this study were to 1) determine if this curriculum could be delivered in a day course to SAGES-HOC faculty and 2) assess the impact of such training on learners’ educational experience taught by this faculty at a subsequent SAGES-HOC.
Methods and procedures
Six experts attended a one-day Lapco-TT course. SAGES-HOC participants were split into two groups: Group A taught by Lapco-TT trained, and Group B by “untrained” course faculty. Opinion surveys were completed by both the SAGES-HOC learners and the Lapco-TT trained course faculty. Furthermore, the latter underwent self-, learner-, and observer-based evaluation using a previously validated teaching assessment tool (cSTTAR). Mean scores were reported and analyzed [Mann–Whitney U, t test (p < 0.05)].
Results
All 6 Lapco-TT delegates found the course useful (5), and felt that it would influence the way they taught in the OR (4.83), that their course objectives were met (4.83), and that they would recommend the course to their colleagues (4.83). Of the SAGES-HOC participants, compared to Group B (n = 22), Group A learners(n = 10) better understood what they were supposed to learn (5 vs. 4.15 [p = 0.046]) and do (5 vs. 4 [p = 0.046]), felt that the session was well organized (5 vs. 4 [p = 0.046]), that time was used effectively (5 vs. 3.9 [p = 0.046]), and that performance feedback was sufficient (5 vs. 3.9 [p = 0.028]) and effective (5 vs. 3.95 [p = 0.028]). Group A faculty were rated significantly higher by their learners on the cSTTARs than Group B (p < 0.0005). Group A faculty rated themselves significantly lower than both expert observers (p < 0.0005) and compared to the Group B faculty’s self-assessment (p < 0.002).
Conclusions
The Lapco-TT course can be delivered effectively over one day and impacts the educational experience of learners at a SAGES-HOC. This could help establish a standardized method of teaching at SAGES-HOCs and thereby increase their value for learners.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Wyles SM, Miskovic D, Ni Z, Acheson AG, Maxwell-Armstrong C, Longman R, Cecil T, Coleman MG, Horgan AF, Hanna GB (2011) Analysis of laboratory-based laparoscopic colorectal surgery workshops within the English National Training Programme. Surg Endosc 25(5):1559–1566
http://www.sages.org. Accessed 13 March 2016
Personal correspondence from Erin Schwarz regarding results from SAGES survey 2013
Paige JT, Farrell T, Bergman S, Selim N, Harzman AE, Schwarz E, Hori Y, Levine J, Scott DJ (2013) Evolution of practice gaps in gastrointestinal and endoscopic surgery: 2012 report from the Society of Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Continuing Education Committee. Surg Endosc 27(12):4429–4438 Epub 2013 Nov. 7
McLemore E, Paige JT, Bergman S, Hori Y, Schwarz E, Farrell TM (2015 Nov) Ongoing evolution of practice gaps in gastrointestinal and endoscopic surgery: 2014 report from the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) continuing education committee. Surg Endosc 29(11):3017–3029 Epub 2015 Sep 3.
Mackenzie H, Cuming T, Miskovic D, Wyles SM, Langsford L, Anderson J, Thomas-Gibson S, Valori R, Hanna GB, Coleman MG, Francis N (2015) Design, delivery and validation of a trainer curriculum for the national laparoscopic colorectal training program in England. Ann Surg 261(1):149–156. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000000437
Wyles SM, Miskovic D, Ni Z, Darzi AW, Valori RM, Coleman MG, Hanna GB (2016 Mar) Development and implementation of the Structured Training Trainer Assessment Report (STTAR) in the English National Training Programme for laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 30(3):993–1003
http://www.lapco.nhs.uk. Accessed 13 March 2016
http://www.jets.nhs.uk. Accessed 13 March 2016
Heniford BT, Backus CL, Matthews BD, Greene FL, Teel WB, Sing RF (2001 Mar) Optimal teaching environment for laparoscopic splenectomy. Am J Surg 181(3):226–230
Acknowledgements
The Author thanks the Professor George Hanna, Imperial College London, for permitting the use of the cSTTAR assessment form at both courses; Erika Dawkins, Project Specialist, Methodist Institute for Technology, Innovation and Education (MITIE), for offering support and expertise in advance of this activity; and Dr. L. Michael Brunt, MD (SAGES 2015 President), Dr. Aurora Pryor, MD (SAGES 2015 Program Chair), and Dr. Michael Holzman, MD (SAGES 2015 Program Co-Chair) for supporting and encouraging this new educational modality during the SAGES 2015 meeting.
Funding
SAGES received no commercial support for this activity. SAGES provided support directly to this project.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Disclosures
Erin Schwarz: consulting relationship with BSC Management, the association management firm contracted to provide administrative services to SAGES. John Paige: Royalties from Oxford University Press as co-editor for Simulation in Radiology; grant funding from Acell, Inc. as PI for wound research; grant funding from Intuitive, Inc. as site PI for FRS validation study; grant funding from LSU Board of Regents as co-PI for LIFT2 software development grant; grant funding from HRSA as lead faculty for IPE training grant. Susannah M. Wyles, Jonathan Dort, Nabil Tariq, Tom Cecil, Mark G. Coleman, Brian J. Dunkin declares that they have no conflict of interest.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wyles, S.M., Schwarz, E., Dort, J. et al. SAGE(S) advice: application of a standardized train the trainer model for faculty involved in a Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) hands-on course. Surg Endosc 31, 2017–2022 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5463-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5463-7