Establishing Validity for a Vaginal Hysterectomy Simulation Model for Surgical Skills Assessment.

OBJECTIVE: To use the Messick validity framework for a simulation-based assessment of vaginal hysterectomy skills. METHODS: Video recordings of physicians at different levels of training and experience performing vaginal hysterectomy on a high-fidelity vaginal surgery model were objectively assessed using a modified 10-item Vaginal Surgical Skills Index, a one-item global scale of overall performance, and a pass-fail criterion. Participants included obstetrics and gynecology trainees and faculty from five institutions. Video recordings were independently assessed by expert surgeons blinded to the identities of the study participants. RESULTS: Fifty surgeons (11 faculty, 39 trainees) were assessed. Experience level correlated strongly with both the modified Vaginal Surgical Skills Index and global scale score, with more experienced participants receiving higher scores (Pearson r=0.81, P<.001; Pearson r=0.74, P<.001). Likewise, surgical experience was also moderately correlated with the modified Vaginal Surgical Skills Index and global scale score (Pearson r=0.55, P<.001; Pearson r=0.58, P<.001). The internal consistency of the modified Vaginal Surgical Skills Index was excellent (Cronbach's alpha=0.97). Interrater reliability of the modified Vaginal Surgical Skills Index and global scale score, as measured by the intraclass correlation coefficient, was moderate to good (0.49-0.95; 0.50-0.87). Using the receiver operating characteristic curve and the pass-fail criterion, a modified Vaginal Surgical Skills Index cutoff score of 27 was found to most accurately (area under the curve 0.951, 95% CI 0.917-0.983) differentiate competent from noncompetent surgeons. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated validity evidence for using a high-fidelity vaginal surgery model with the modified Vaginal Surgical Skills Index or global scale score to assess vaginal hysterectomy skills.

Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare conventional laparoscopic and robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal apex prolapse. METHODS: This single-center, blinded randomized trial included participants with stage 2-4 posthysterectomy vaginal prolapse. Participants were randomized to laparoscopic or robotic sacrocolpopexy. The primary outcome was total operative time from incision to closure. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain, functional activity, bowel and bladder symptoms, quality of life, anatomic vaginal support, and cost from a health care system perspective. RESULTS: A total of 78 patients enrolled and were randomized (laparoscopic n=38; robotic n=40). Total operative time was significantly longer in the robotic group compared with the laparoscopic group (+67-minute difference; 95% confidence interval [CI] 43-89; P<.001). Anesthesia time, total time in the operating room, total sacrocolpopexy time, and total suturing time were all significantly longer in the robotic group. Participants in the robotic group also had significantly higher pain at rest and with activity during weeks 3 through 5 after surgery and required longer use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (median, 20 compared with 11 days, P<.005). The robotic group incurred greater cost than the laparoscopic group (mean difference +$1,936; 95% CI $417-$3,454; P=.008). Both groups demonstrated significant improvement in vaginal support and functional outcomes 1 year after surgery with no differences between groups. CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy results in longer operating time and increased pain and cost compared with the conventional laparoscopic approach.