Comparative effectiveness of telesimulation versus standard simulation for pediatric Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) essential skills training.

BACKGROUND: Proctored on site simulation-based surgical education has been integrated in our residents curricula since 2012. Due to COVID-19 pandemic and social distance protocols, we developed a Tele-assisted Essential Skills Training Module (T-ESTM). The aim of this study is to evaluate comparative effectiveness between Telesimulation (T) versus Standard Simulation (S) for minimally invasive surgery (MIS) essential skills training. METHODS: ESTM includes academic lectures, tutorials for ergonomics and 7 hands-on tasks scheduled into 2 sessions of 3 hours. Initial and final assessment scoring (adapted from GOALS) as well as timing for 3 of the tasks were registered. Telesimulation (T) group accessed the content online and completed their Hands-On practice through a digital communication platform. Standard Simulation (S) group attended conferences and Hands-On practice at the simulation center. Both groups were proctored by the same educators with summative and formative feedback and debriefing. Data was analyzed with the R-studio software program. RESULTS: Each group had 20 participants with a mean age of 28 ± 5 years. 67.5% were surgeons in training, 47.5% had performed low complexity procedures and 40% had previous experience with simulation training. We observed a significant improvement in scoring and time reduction for all assessed tasks in S and T groups (p < 0.001), with no statistically significant differences when comparing both groups. Similar performance could be achieved with both strategies. CONCLUSION: Telesimulation is a reproducible and effective educational tool for remote MIS essential skills training, and should be considered as an alternative to on-site simulation programs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II. TYPE OF STUDY: Clinical Research.

Effectiveness of telesimulation for pediatric minimally invasive surgery essential skills training.

BACKGROUND: In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing rules, access to in-person training activities had temporarily been interrupted, speeding up the implementation of telesimulation for minimally invasive surgery (MIS) essential skills training (T-ESTM, Telesimulation - Essential Skills Training Module) in our center. The aim of this study was to explore the effectiveness of T-ESTM. METHODS: T-ESTM was scheduled into 2 sessions of 3 h through the Zoom® virtual meeting platform. The academic lectures, the tutorials for box-trainer set-up and 7 performance tasks were accessed through an online campus previous to the remote encounter for personalized guidance and debriefing. Initial (pre-telementoring) and final (post 6-hour telementoring) assessment scoring as well as timing for Task 2 (circle-cutting pattern), 3 (extracorporeal Roeder knot) and 5 (intracorporeal Square knot) were registered. RESULTS: 61 participants were recruited. The mean age was 31±5 years. 65% were surgical residents. 48% performed low complexity procedures. 52% had previous experience with simulation training. In Task 2, there was a 21% improvement in the final score obtained, as well as a significant decrease in time of 33%; in Task 3, there was an increase of 39% in the scoring and a decrease of 49% in the timing; and in Task 5, participants improved their technique a 30% and decreased the performance time a 47%. All the differences were statistically significant. DISCUSSION: Our data support T-ESTM as a reproducible and effective educational tool for remote MIS essential skills hands-on training. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Validation of an inanimate low cost model for training minimal invasive surgery (MIS) of esophageal atresia with tracheoesophageal fistula (AE/TEF) repair.

UNLABELLED: We present the results of the validation of an inanimate model created for training thoracoscopic treatment of esophageal atresia with lower tracheoesophageal fistula (EA/TEF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used different domestic materials such as a piece of wood (support), corrugated plastic tubes (PVC) of different sizes to simulate ribs, intercostal spaces, trachea and spine and tubular latex balloons to simulate the esophagus and lungs to make the basic model. This device was inserted into the thoracic cavity of a rubber dummy simulating a 3kg newborn with a work area volume of 50ml. The model was designed taking into account the experience of doing this procedure in neonates. The cost of the materials used was 50 US$. Regular video endoscopic equipment and 3mm instruments were used. Thirty-nine international faculty or pediatric surgeons attending hands on courses with different levels of training in minimal invasive surgery (MIS) repair of EA/TEF performed the procedure in the model. We compared the performance of the practitioners with their experience in thoracoscopic repair of EA. A Likert-type scale was used to evaluate results. Previous experience in MIS, anatomical appearance of the model, surgical anatomy compared to a real patient, and utility as a training method were analyzed. We also used a checklist to assess performance. We evaluated: number of errors and types of injuries, quality of the anastomosis, and duration of procedure. To analyze the results we used a T-test, chi-square test and Excel® database to match up some results. RESULTS: Thirty-nine questionnaires were completed. Seven surgeons were experts (≥30 TEF/EA repairs as surgeon), 10 had intermediate level of experience (5 to 29 repairs as surgeon) and 22 were beginners (less than 5 repairs). To simplify the analysis we divided the respondents into low experience LE (<5 real procedures-beginners; n=22) and high experience HE (intermediate, 10; and experts, 7; n=17). In relation to the anatomical characteristics of the model, 94.48% (n=37) respondents considered that the model has a high degree of similarity or good similarity; in relation to surgical anatomy 88.2% (n=34) respondents considered that the model has a high degree of similarity or good similarity; 87.17% (n=34) respondents considered that the model can generate a good amount of skills and/or can generate great majority of skills to EA/TEF repair; and 12.82% (n=5) respondents consider that it can generate some skills or a few skills, only in relation to trocar placement, one of the surveyed items. The number of errors was 29±7 SD (20 to 51) for the low experience group (LE) and 9±6 SD (1 to 20) for the high experience group (HE) (P value<0.0001). Time in minutes was significantly lower in the HE group (40±9 SD; 26 to 58min), in relation with LE (81±19 SD; 49 to 118min) (P<0.0001, T-test). Deficient or incomplete anastomosis also showed differences: 7 (32%) in the LE group and 1 (6%) in the HE group (P = 0.04, chi-square test). We saw a correlation between the previous experience of the surgeon and their performance in the model considering operating time, quality of anastomosis and peripheral tissue damage. According to the suggestions registered in the questionnaires, we have now improved the model. We have also started using it in a scenario to simulate the whole neonatal MIS operative room setting and team work.