Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Validity evidence for a new portable, lower-cost platform for the fundamentals of endoscopic surgery skills test.
Mueller, Carmen L; Kaneva, Pepa; Fried, Gerald M; Mellinger, John D; Marks, Jeffrey M; Dunkin, Brian J; van Sickle, Kent; Vassiliou, Melina C.
Afiliação
  • Mueller CL; Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada. carmenleandramueller@gmail.com.
  • Kaneva P; Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. carmenleandramueller@gmail.com.
  • Fried GM; Montreal General Hospital, Room E19-125, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Montreal, QC, H3G 1A4, Canada. carmenleandramueller@gmail.com.
  • Mellinger JD; Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.
  • Marks JM; Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
  • Dunkin BJ; Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.
  • van Sickle K; Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
  • Vassiliou MC; Division of General Surgery, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield, IL, USA.
Surg Endosc ; 30(3): 1107-12, 2016 Mar.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26139481
BACKGROUND: The fundamentals of endoscopic surgery (FES) examination measures the knowledge and skills required to perform safe flexible endoscopy. A potential limitation of the FES skills test is the size and cost of the simulator on which it was developed (GI Mentor II virtual reality endoscopy simulator; Simbionix LTD, Israel). A more compact and lower-cost alternative (GI Mentor Express) was developed to address this issue. The purpose of this study was to obtain evidence for the validity of scores obtained on the Express platform, so that it can be used for testing. STUDY DESIGN: General surgery residents at various levels of training and practicing endoscopists at five institutions participated. Each completed the five FES tasks on both simulator platforms in random order, with 3-14 days between tests. Scores were calculated using the same standardized computer-generated algorithm and compared using Pearson's correlation coefficient. RESULTS: There were 58 participants (mean age 32; 76% male) with a broad range of endoscopic experience. The mean (95% confidence interval) FES scores were 72 (67:77) on the GI Mentor II and 66 (60:71) on the Express. The correlation between scores on the two platforms was 0.86 (0.77:0.91; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: There is a high correlation between FES manual skills scores measured on the original platform and the new Express, providing evidence to support the use of the GI Mentor Express for FES testing.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cirurgia Geral / Endoscopia do Sistema Digestório / Competência Clínica Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies Limite: Adult / Humans / Male País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cirurgia Geral / Endoscopia do Sistema Digestório / Competência Clínica Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies Limite: Adult / Humans / Male País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article