Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 2/2024

12-10-2023 | Sleeve Gastrectomy | 2023 SAGES Oral

Use of targeted educational resources to improve robotic bariatric surgery training

Authors: Julie M. Clanahan, Michael M. Awad, Francesca M. Dimou

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 2/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Evidence for how to best train surgical residents for robotic bariatric procedures is lacking. We developed targeted educational resources to promote progression on the robotic bariatric learning curve. This study aimed to characterize the effect of resources on resident participation in robotic bariatric procedures.

Methods

Performance metrics from the da Vinci Surgical System were retrospectively reviewed for sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) cases involving general surgery trainees with a single robotic bariatric surgeon. Pictorial case guides and narrated operative videos were developed for these procedures and disseminated to trainees. Percent active control time (%ACT)—amount of trainee console time spent in active instrument manipulations over total active time from both consoles—was the primary outcome measure following dissemination. One-way ANOVA, Student’s t-tests, and Pearson correlations were applied.

Results

From September 2020 to July 2021, 50 cases (54% SG, 46% RYGB) involving 14 unique trainees (PGY1-PGY5) were included. From November 2021 to May 2022 following dissemination, 29 cases (34% SG, 66% RYGB) involving 8 unique trainees were included. Mean %ACT significantly increased across most trainee groups following resource distribution: 21% versus 38% for PGY3s (p = 0.087), 32% versus 45% for PGY4s (p = 0.0009), and 38% versus 57% for PGY5s (p = 0.0015) and remained significant when stratified by case type. Progressive trainee %ACT was not associated with total active time for SG cases before or after intervention (pre r = − 0.0019, p = 0.9; post r = − 0.039, p = 0.9). It was moderately positively associated with total active time for RYGB cases before dissemination (r = 0.46, p = 0.027) but lost this association following intervention (r = 0.16, p = 0.5).

Conclusion

Use of targeted educational resources promoted increases in trainee participation in robotic bariatric procedures with more time spent actively operating at the console. As educators continue to develop robotic training curricula, efforts should include high-quality resource development for other sub-specialty procedures. Future work will examine the impact of increased trainee participation on clinical and patient outcomes.

Graphical abstract

Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Armijo PR, Pagkratis S, Boilesen E, Tanner T, Oleynikov D (2018) Growth in robotic-assisted procedures is from conversion of laparoscopic procedures and not from open surgeons’ conversion: a study of trends and costs. Surg Endosc 32(4):2106–2113CrossRefPubMed Armijo PR, Pagkratis S, Boilesen E, Tanner T, Oleynikov D (2018) Growth in robotic-assisted procedures is from conversion of laparoscopic procedures and not from open surgeons’ conversion: a study of trends and costs. Surg Endosc 32(4):2106–2113CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Scarritt T, Hsu CH, Maegawa FB, Ayala AE, Mobily M, Ghaderi I (2021) Trends in utilization and perioperative outcomes in robotic-assisted bariatric surgery using the MBSAQIP database: a 4-year analysis. Obes Surg 31(2):854–861CrossRefPubMed Scarritt T, Hsu CH, Maegawa FB, Ayala AE, Mobily M, Ghaderi I (2021) Trends in utilization and perioperative outcomes in robotic-assisted bariatric surgery using the MBSAQIP database: a 4-year analysis. Obes Surg 31(2):854–861CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Tatarian T, Yang J, Wang J et al (2021) Trends in the utilization and perioperative outcomes of primary robotic bariatric surgery from 2015 to 2018: a study of 46,764 patients from the MBSAQIP data registry. Surg Endosc 35(7):3915–3922CrossRefPubMed Tatarian T, Yang J, Wang J et al (2021) Trends in the utilization and perioperative outcomes of primary robotic bariatric surgery from 2015 to 2018: a study of 46,764 patients from the MBSAQIP data registry. Surg Endosc 35(7):3915–3922CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Fourman MM, Saber AA (2012) Robotic bariatric surgery: a systematic review. Surg Obes Relat Dis 8(4):483–488CrossRefPubMed Fourman MM, Saber AA (2012) Robotic bariatric surgery: a systematic review. Surg Obes Relat Dis 8(4):483–488CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Li K, Zou J, Tang J, Di J, Han X, Zhang P (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Surg 26(12):3031–3044CrossRefPubMed Li K, Zou J, Tang J, Di J, Han X, Zhang P (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Surg 26(12):3031–3044CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Zhang Z, Miao L, Ren Z, Li Y (2021) Robotic bariatric surgery for the obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 35(6):2440–2456CrossRefPubMed Zhang Z, Miao L, Ren Z, Li Y (2021) Robotic bariatric surgery for the obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 35(6):2440–2456CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Toro JP, Lin E, Patel AD (2015) Review of robotics in foregut and bariatric surgery. Surg Endosc 29(1):1–8CrossRefPubMed Toro JP, Lin E, Patel AD (2015) Review of robotics in foregut and bariatric surgery. Surg Endosc 29(1):1–8CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Sanchez BR, Mohr CJ, Morton JM, Safadi BY, Alami RS, Curet MJ (2005) Comparison of totally robotic laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and traditional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Obes Relat Dis 1(6):549–554CrossRefPubMed Sanchez BR, Mohr CJ, Morton JM, Safadi BY, Alami RS, Curet MJ (2005) Comparison of totally robotic laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and traditional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Obes Relat Dis 1(6):549–554CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Starnes CC, Gochnour DC, Hall B, Wilson EB, Snyder BE (2015) The economy of motion of the totally robotic gastric bypass: technique, learning curve, and outcomes of a fellowship-trained, robotic bariatric surgeon. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 25(5):411–418CrossRefPubMed Starnes CC, Gochnour DC, Hall B, Wilson EB, Snyder BE (2015) The economy of motion of the totally robotic gastric bypass: technique, learning curve, and outcomes of a fellowship-trained, robotic bariatric surgeon. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 25(5):411–418CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Goldberg I, Yang J, Park J et al (2018) Surgical trainee impact on bariatric surgery safety. Surg Endosc 33(9):3014–3025CrossRefPubMed Goldberg I, Yang J, Park J et al (2018) Surgical trainee impact on bariatric surgery safety. Surg Endosc 33(9):3014–3025CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Winder JS, Juza RM, Sasaki J, Rogers AM, Pauli EM, Haluck RS, Estes SJ, Lyn-Sue JR (2016) Implementing a robotics curriculum at an academic general surgery training program: our initial experience. J Robot Surg 10(3):209–2013CrossRefPubMed Winder JS, Juza RM, Sasaki J, Rogers AM, Pauli EM, Haluck RS, Estes SJ, Lyn-Sue JR (2016) Implementing a robotics curriculum at an academic general surgery training program: our initial experience. J Robot Surg 10(3):209–2013CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Mustafa S, Handren E, Farmer D, Ontiveros E, Ogola GO, Leeds SG (2019) Robotic curriculum enhances minimally invasive general surgery residents’ education. J Surg Educ 76(2):548–553CrossRefPubMed Mustafa S, Handren E, Farmer D, Ontiveros E, Ogola GO, Leeds SG (2019) Robotic curriculum enhances minimally invasive general surgery residents’ education. J Surg Educ 76(2):548–553CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Gerull W, Zihni A, Awad M (2020) Operative performance outcomes of a simulator-based robotic skills curriculum. Surg Endosc 34(10):4543–4548CrossRefPubMed Gerull W, Zihni A, Awad M (2020) Operative performance outcomes of a simulator-based robotic skills curriculum. Surg Endosc 34(10):4543–4548CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Chen R, Rodrigues Armijo P, Krause C, Siu KC, Oleynikov D, SAGES Robotic Task Force (2020) A comprehensive review of robotic surgery curriculum and training for residents, fellows, and postgraduate surgical education. Surg Endosc 34(1):361–367CrossRefPubMed Chen R, Rodrigues Armijo P, Krause C, Siu KC, Oleynikov D, SAGES Robotic Task Force (2020) A comprehensive review of robotic surgery curriculum and training for residents, fellows, and postgraduate surgical education. Surg Endosc 34(1):361–367CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Mota P, Carvalho N, Carvalho-Dias E, João Costa M, Correia-Pinto J, Lima E (2018) Video-based surgical learning: improving trainee education and preparation for surgery. J Surg Educ 75(3):828–835CrossRefPubMed Mota P, Carvalho N, Carvalho-Dias E, João Costa M, Correia-Pinto J, Lima E (2018) Video-based surgical learning: improving trainee education and preparation for surgery. J Surg Educ 75(3):828–835CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Rapp AK, Healy MG, Charlton ME, Keith JN, Rosenbaum ME, Kapadia MR (2016) YouTube is the most frequently used educational video source for surgical preparation. J Surg Educ 73(6):1072–1076CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rapp AK, Healy MG, Charlton ME, Keith JN, Rosenbaum ME, Kapadia MR (2016) YouTube is the most frequently used educational video source for surgical preparation. J Surg Educ 73(6):1072–1076CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Iranmanesh P, Morel P, Wagner OJ, Inan I, Pugin F, Hagen ME (2010) Set-up and docking of the da Vinci surgical system: prospective analysis of initial experience. Int J Med Robot 6(1):57–60CrossRefPubMed Iranmanesh P, Morel P, Wagner OJ, Inan I, Pugin F, Hagen ME (2010) Set-up and docking of the da Vinci surgical system: prospective analysis of initial experience. Int J Med Robot 6(1):57–60CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference van der Schans EM, Hiep MAJ, Consten ECJ, Broeders IAMJ (2020) From Da Vinci Si to Da Vinci Xi: realistic times in draping and docking the robot. J Robot Surg 14(6):835–839CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral van der Schans EM, Hiep MAJ, Consten ECJ, Broeders IAMJ (2020) From Da Vinci Si to Da Vinci Xi: realistic times in draping and docking the robot. J Robot Surg 14(6):835–839CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Kern DE, Thomas PA, Bass EB, Howard DM (1998) Curriculum development for medical education: a six step approach. JHU Press, BaltimoreCrossRef Kern DE, Thomas PA, Bass EB, Howard DM (1998) Curriculum development for medical education: a six step approach. JHU Press, BaltimoreCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Sánchez R, Rodríguez O, Rosciano J et al (2016) Robotic surgery training: construct validity of Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS). J Robot Surg 10(3):227–231CrossRefPubMed Sánchez R, Rodríguez O, Rosciano J et al (2016) Robotic surgery training: construct validity of Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS). J Robot Surg 10(3):227–231CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Addison P, Yoo A, Duarte-Ramos J et al (2021) Correlation between operative time and crowd-sourced skills assessment for robotic bariatric surgery. Surg Endosc 35(9):5303–5309CrossRefPubMed Addison P, Yoo A, Duarte-Ramos J et al (2021) Correlation between operative time and crowd-sourced skills assessment for robotic bariatric surgery. Surg Endosc 35(9):5303–5309CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Krell RW, Birkmeyer NJ, Reames BN et al (2014) Effects of resident involvement on complication rates after laparoscopic gastric bypass. J Am Coll Surg 218(2):253–260CrossRefPubMed Krell RW, Birkmeyer NJ, Reames BN et al (2014) Effects of resident involvement on complication rates after laparoscopic gastric bypass. J Am Coll Surg 218(2):253–260CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Doyon L, Moreno-Koehler A, Ricciardi R, Nepomnayshy D (2016) Resident participation in laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a comparison of outcomes from the ACS-NSQIP database. Surg Endosc 30(8):3216–3224CrossRefPubMed Doyon L, Moreno-Koehler A, Ricciardi R, Nepomnayshy D (2016) Resident participation in laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a comparison of outcomes from the ACS-NSQIP database. Surg Endosc 30(8):3216–3224CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Martinovski M, Navratil AL, Zeni T, Jonker M, Ferraro J, Albright J, Cleary RK (2017) Effects of resident or fellow participation in sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass: results from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP). J Am Coll Surg 225(4):S14CrossRef Martinovski M, Navratil AL, Zeni T, Jonker M, Ferraro J, Albright J, Cleary RK (2017) Effects of resident or fellow participation in sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass: results from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP). J Am Coll Surg 225(4):S14CrossRef
28.
go back to reference de’Angelis N, Gavriilidis P, Martínez-Pérez A et al (2019) Educational value of surgical videos on YouTube: quality assessment of laparoscopic appendectomy videos by senior surgeons vs. novice trainees. World J Emerg Surg 14(22):1–11 de’Angelis N, Gavriilidis P, Martínez-Pérez A et al (2019) Educational value of surgical videos on YouTube: quality assessment of laparoscopic appendectomy videos by senior surgeons vs. novice trainees. World J Emerg Surg 14(22):1–11
29.
go back to reference Deal SB, Alseidi AA (2017) Concerns of quality and safety in public domain surgical education videos: an assessment of the critical view of safety in frequently used laparoscopic cholecystectomy videos. J Am Coll Surg 225(6):725–730CrossRefPubMed Deal SB, Alseidi AA (2017) Concerns of quality and safety in public domain surgical education videos: an assessment of the critical view of safety in frequently used laparoscopic cholecystectomy videos. J Am Coll Surg 225(6):725–730CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Rodriguez HA, Young MT, Jackson HT, Oelschlager BK, Wright AS (2018) Viewer discretion advised: is YouTube a friend or foe in surgical education? Surg Endosc 32(4):1724–1728CrossRefPubMed Rodriguez HA, Young MT, Jackson HT, Oelschlager BK, Wright AS (2018) Viewer discretion advised: is YouTube a friend or foe in surgical education? Surg Endosc 32(4):1724–1728CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Jackson HT, Hung CS, Potarazu D et al (2022) Attending guidance advised: educational quality of surgical videos on YouTube. Surg Endosc 36(6):4189–4198CrossRefPubMed Jackson HT, Hung CS, Potarazu D et al (2022) Attending guidance advised: educational quality of surgical videos on YouTube. Surg Endosc 36(6):4189–4198CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Celentano V, Smart N, McGrath J et al (2018) LAP-VEGaS practice guidelines for reporting of educational videos in laparoscopic surgery: a joint trainers and trainees consensus statement. Ann Surg 268(6):920–926CrossRefPubMed Celentano V, Smart N, McGrath J et al (2018) LAP-VEGaS practice guidelines for reporting of educational videos in laparoscopic surgery: a joint trainers and trainees consensus statement. Ann Surg 268(6):920–926CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Celentano V, Smart N, Cahill RA et al (2021) Development and validation of a recommended checklist for assessment of surgical videos quality: the LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS (LAP-VEGaS) video assessment tool. Surg Endosc 35(3):1362–1369CrossRefPubMed Celentano V, Smart N, Cahill RA et al (2021) Development and validation of a recommended checklist for assessment of surgical videos quality: the LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS (LAP-VEGaS) video assessment tool. Surg Endosc 35(3):1362–1369CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Use of targeted educational resources to improve robotic bariatric surgery training
Authors
Julie M. Clanahan
Michael M. Awad
Francesca M. Dimou
Publication date
12-10-2023
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 2/2024
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10436-9

Other articles of this Issue 2/2024

Surgical Endoscopy 2/2024 Go to the issue