Developing a phantom for simulating robotic-assisted complete mesocolic excision using 3D printing and medical imaging.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted complete mesocolic excision is an advanced procedure mainly because of the great variability in anatomy. Phantoms can be used for simulation-based training and assessment of competency when learning new surgical procedures. However, no phantoms for robotic complete mesocolic excision have previously been described. This study aimed to develop an anatomically true-to-life phantom, which can be used for training with a robotic system situated in the clinical setting and can be used for the assessment of surgical competency. METHODS: Established pathology and surgical assessment tools for complete mesocolic excision and specimens were used for the phantom development. Each assessment item was translated into an engineering development task and evaluated for relevance. Anatomical realism was obtained by extracting relevant organs from preoperative patient scans and 3D printing casting moulds for each organ. Each element of the phantom was evaluated by two experienced complete mesocolic excision surgeons without influencing each other's answers and their feedback was used in an iterative process of prototype development and testing. RESULTS: It was possible to integrate 35 out of 48 procedure-specific items from the surgical assessment tool and all elements from the pathological evaluation tool. By adding fluorophores to the mesocolic tissue, we developed an easy way to assess the integrity of the mesocolon using ultraviolet light. The phantom was built using silicone, is easy to store, and can be used in robotic systems designated for patient procedures as it does not contain animal-derived parts. CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed phantom could be used for training and competency assessment for robotic-assisted complete mesocolic excision surgery in a simulated setting.

Training and assessment for colorectal surgery and appendectomy- a systematic review.

AIM: There is currently an increased focus on competency-based training, in which training and assessment play a crucial role. The aim of this systematic review is to create an overview of hands-on training methods and assessment tools for appendectomy and colon and rectal surgery procedures using either an open, laparoscopic or robot-assisted approach. METHOD: A systematic review of Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Scopus databases was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. We conducted the last search on 9 March 2023. All published papers describing hands-on training, evaluation of performance data and development of assessment tools were eligible. The quality of studies and the validity evidence of assessment tools are reported. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies were identified. Laparoscopic assessment tools are abundant, but the literature still lacks good-quality assessment tools for open appendectomy, robotic colectomy and open rectal surgery. Overall, there is a lack of discussion regarding the establishment of pass/fail standards and the consequences of assessment. Virtual reality simulation is used more for appendectomy than colorectal procedures. Only a few of the studies investigating training were of acceptable quality. There is a need for high-quality studies in open and robotic-assisted colon surgery and all approaches to rectal surgery. CONCLUSION: This review provides an overview of current training methods and assessment tools and identifies where more research is needed based on the quality of the studies and the current validity evidence.

Transfer of skills between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted surgery is today well-implemented in many surgical specialties, but requires another skill set than laparoscopy. Most often, robot-assisted surgery is considered add-on to laparoscopic skills but very little is known about the transfer of skills. The aim of the study was to examine to what extent surgical skills are transferable between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in three databases (Ovid Medline, Embase, and Web of Science). Studies investigating transfer of skills between laparoscopy and robot-assisted surgery in either a phantom-based, simulation-based, animal model, or clinical setting were eligible for inclusion. Quality assessment was done using the Medical education research study quality instrument and educational New Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Of 15,610 studies identified, 89 studies continued to full-text reading, and 37 studies were included. Four studies were found non-comparable and were left out of the results for the primary outcome. All 33 studies explored transfer from laparoscopy to robot-assisted surgery and 17 found a positive transfer whereas 15 did not. Only 11 studies explored transfer from robot-assisted surgery to laparoscopy, of which only three found a positive transfer. CONCLUSION: An almost equal number of publications found a positive transfer and no transfer from laparoscopic to robot-assisted surgery. Fewer studies explored the transfer from robot-assisted surgery to laparoscopy. Very little evidence supports that surgeons trained solely in robot-assisted surgery can perform laparoscopy. This must be considered in future training programs as robot-assisted surgery is expected to become the first-in-line modality for many future surgeons.

Identifying curriculum content for operating room nurses involved in robotic-assisted surgery: a Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, no generally accepted curriculum for operating room nurses (OR nurses) working with robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) exists. OR nurses working with RAS require different competencies than regular OR nurses, e.g. knowledge of the robotic system and equipment and specific emergency undocking procedures. The objective of this study was to identify learning goals for a curriculum for OR nurses working with RAS and to investigate which learning methods should be used. METHODS: A three-round Delphi approach, with an additional survey, was used in this study. Four OR nurses from every department in gynecology, urology, and surgical gastroenterology doing RAS in Denmark were invited to participate. RESULTS: The response rates were 93%, 81%, and 79%, respectively, in the three rounds of the Delphi survey and 68% in the additional survey. After the processing of data, a list of 57 learning goals, sorted under 11 domains, was produced. 41 learning goals were rated Relevant, Very relevant, or Essential spread over 10 of the 11 domains. The top 3 learning goals rated as Essential: Identify the most common injuries related to patient positioning during robotic-assisted surgery and know how to avoid them, Connect, calibrate and handle the scope, Perform an emergency undocking procedure. The panel rated Supervised training during surgery on patients as the most relevant learning method, followed by Dry lab and Team training. CONCLUSIONS: The learning goals identified in this study, can be used as the basis for a curriculum for OR nurses working with RAS. During the processing, it became clear that there is a need to further investigate issues such as communication challenges, awareness of emergency procedures, and differences in the skills required depending on the role of the RAS nurse.

Identifying curriculum content for a cross-specialty robotic-assisted surgery training program: a Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted surgery is increasing and there is a need for a structured and evidence-based curriculum to learn basic robotic competencies. Relevant training tasks, eligible trainees, realistic learning goals, and suitable training methods must be identified. We sought to develop a common curriculum that can ensure basic competencies across specialties. METHODS: Two robotic surgeons from all departments in Denmark conducting robotic-assisted surgery within gynecology, urology, and gastrointestinal surgery, were invited to participate in a three-round Delphi study to identify learning goals and rank them according to relevance for a basic curriculum. An additional survey was conducted after the Delphi rounds on what training methods were considered best for each learning goal and who (console surgeon/patient-side assistant) should master each learning goal. RESULTS: Fifty-six robotic surgeons participated and the response rates were 86%, 89%, and 77%, for rounds 1, 2 and 3, respectively. The Delphi study identified 40 potential learning goals, of which 29 were ranked as essential, e.g., Understand the link between arm placement and freedom of movement or Be able to perform emergency un-docking. In the additional survey, the response rate was 70%. Twenty-two (55%) of the identified learning goals were found relevant for the patient-side assistant and twenty-four (60%) were linked to a specific suitable learning method with > 75% agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings can help training centers plan their training programs concerning educational content and methods for training/learning. Furthermore, patient-side assistants should also receive basic skills training in robotic surgery.

Ensuring Basic Competence in Thoracentesis.

BACKGROUND: Trocar pigtail catheter thoracentesis (TPCT) is a common procedure often performed by junior physicians. Simulation-based training may effectively train physicians in the procedure prior to performing it on patients. An assessment tool with solid validity evidence is necessary to ensure sufficient procedural competence. OBJECTIVES: Our study objectives were (1) to collect evidence of validity for a newly developed pigtail catheter assessment tool (Thoracentesis Assessment Tool [ThorAT]) developed for the evaluation of TPCT performance and (2) to establish a pass/fail score for summative assessment. METHODS: We assessed the validity evidence for the ThorAT using the recommended framework for validity by Messick. Thirty-four participants completed two consecutive procedures and their performance was assessed by two blinded, independent raters using the ThorAT. We compared performance scores to test whether the assessment tool was able to discern between the two groups, and a pass/fail score was established. RESULTS: The assessment tool was able to discriminate between the two groups in terms of competence level. Experienced physicians received significantly higher test scores than novices in both the first and second procedure. A pass/fail score of 25.2 points was established, resulting in 4 (17%) passing novices and 1 (9%) failing experienced participant in the first procedure. In the second procedure 9 (39%) novices passed and 2 (18%) experienced participants failed. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a tool for summative assessment of competence in TPCT. Strong validity evidence was gathered from five sources of evidence. A simulation-based training program using the ThorAT could ensure competence before performing thoracentesis on patients.

Ensuring basic competency in chest tube insertion using a simulated scenario: an international validation study.

INTRODUCTION: Chest tube insertion can be associated with serious complications. A structured training programme is needed to minimise complications and enhance patient safety. Novices should pass a reliable test with solid evidence of validity before performing the procedure supervised on patients. The aim of this study was to establish a credible pass/fail standard. METHODS: We used an established assessment tool the Chest Tube Insertion Competency Test (TUBE-iCOMPT). Validity evidence was explored according to Messick's five sources of validity. Two methods were used to establish a credible pass/fail standard. Contrasting groups' method: 34 doctors (23 novices and 11 experienced surgeons) performed the procedure twice and all procedures were video recorded, edited, blinded and rated by two independent, international raters. Modified Angoff method: seven thoracic surgeons individually determined the scores that defined the pass/fail criteria. The data was gathered in Copenhagen, Denmark and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. RESULTS: Internal consistency reliability was calculated as Cronbach's alpha to 0.94. The generalisability coefficient with two raters and two procedures was 0.91. Mean scores were 50.7 (SD±13.2) and 74.7 (SD±4.8) for novices and experienced surgeons, respectively (p<0.001). The pass/fail score of 62 points resulted in zero false negatives and only three false positives. DISCUSSION: We have gathered valuable additional validity evidence for the assessment tool TUBE-iCOMPT including establishment of a credible pass/fail score. The TUBE-iCOMPT can now be integrated in mastery learning programmes to ensure competency before independent practice.

Simulation-based training in flexible fibreoptic intubation: A randomised study.

BACKGROUND: Flexible fibreoptic intubation (FOI) is a key element in difficult airway management. Training of FOI skills is an important part of the anaesthesiology curriculum. Simulation-based training has been shown to be effective when learning FOI, but the optimal structure of the training is debated. The aspect of dividing the training into segments (part-task training) or assembling into one piece (whole-task training) has not been studied. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to compare the effect of training the motor skills of FOI as part-task training or as whole-task training and to relate the performance levels achieved by the novices to the standard of performance of experienced FOI practitioners. DESIGN: A randomised controlled study. SETTING: Centre for Clinical Education, University of Copenhagen and the Capital Region of Denmark, between January and April 2013. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three anaesthesia residents in their first year of training in anaesthesiology with no experience in FOI, and 10 anaesthesia consultants experienced in FOI. INTERVENTIONS: The novices to FOI were allocated randomly to receive either part-task or whole-task training of FOI on virtual reality simulators. Procedures were subsequently trained on a manikin and assessed by an experienced anaesthesiologist. The experienced group was assessed in the same manner with no prior simulation-based training. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the score of performance on testing FOI skills on a manikin. RESULTS: A positive learning effect was observed in both the part-task training group and the whole-task training group. There was no statistically significant difference in final performance scores of the two novice groups (P = 0.61). Furthermore, both groups of novices were able to improve their skill level significantly by the end of manikin training to levels comparable to the experienced anaesthesiologists. CONCLUSION: Part-task training did not prove more effective than whole-task training when training novices in FOI skills. FOI is very suitable for simulation-based training and segmentation of the procedure during training is not necessary.