Global versus task-specific postoperative feedback in surgical procedure learning.

BACKGROUND: Task-specific checklists and global rating scales are both recommended assessment tools to provide constructive feedback on surgical performance. This study evaluated the most effective feedback tool by comparing the effects of the Observational Clinical Human Reliability Analysis (OCHRA) and the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) on surgical performance in relation to the visual-spatial ability of the learners. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial, medical students were allocated to either the OCHRA (n = 25) or OSATS (n = 25) feedback group. Visual-spatial ability was measured by a Mental Rotation Test. Participants performed an open inguinal hernia repair procedure on a simulation model twice. Feedback was provided after the first procedure. Improvement in performance was evaluated blindly using a global rating scale (performance score) and hand-motion analysis (time and path length). RESULTS: Mean improvement in performance score was not significantly different between the OCHRA and OSATS feedback groups (P = .100). However, mean improvement in time (371.0 ± 223.4 vs 274.6 ± 341.6; P = .027) and path length (53.5 ± 42.4 vs 34.7 ± 39.0; P = .046) was significantly greater in the OCHRA feedback group. When stratified by mental rotation test scores, the greater improvement in time (P = .032) and path length (P = .053) was observed only among individuals with low visual-spatial abilities. CONCLUSION: A task-specific (OCHRA) feedback is more effective in improving surgical skills in terms of time and path length in novices compared to a global rating scale (OSATS). The effects of a task-specific feedback are present mostly in individuals with lower visual-spatial abilities.

One Step at a Time: Step by Step Versus Continuous Video-Based Learning to Prepare Medical Students for Performing Surgical Procedures.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the effects of cognitive load and surgical performance in medical students that performed the open inguinal hernia repair after preparation with step-by-step video-demonstration versus continuous video-demonstration. Hypothetically, the step-by-step group will perceive lower extraneous load during the preparation of the surgical procedure compared to the continuous group. Subsequently, fewer errors will be made in the surgical performance assessment by the step-by-step group, resulting in better surgical performance. DESIGN: In this prospective study, participants were randomly assigned to the step-by-step or continuous video-demonstration. They completed questionnaires regarding perceived cognitive load during preparation (10-point Likert scale). Their surgical performance was assessed on a simulation hernia model using the Observational Clinical Human Reliability Assessment. SETTING: Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included medical students who were enrolled in extracurricular anatomy courses. RESULTS: Forty-three students participated; 23 students in the step-by-step group and 20 in the continuous group. As expected, the step-by-step group perceived a lower extraneous cognitive load (2.92 ± 1.21) compared to the continuous group (3.91 ± 1.67, p = 0.030). The surgical performance was not statistically significantly different between both groups; however, in subanalyses on a selection of students that prepared for 1 to 2 hours, the step-by-step group made less procedural errors, 1.67 ± 1.11, compared to the continuous group, 3.06 ± 1.91, p = 0.018. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that preparation using step-by-step video-based learning results in lower extraneous cognitive load and subsequently fewer procedural errors during the surgical performance. For learning purposes, demonstration videos of surgical procedures should be presented in a segmented format.