Surgical Skill Simulation Training to Proficiency Reduces Procedural Errors among Novice Cardiac Device Implanters. A Randomized Study

Jorio Mascheroni, Martin Stockburger, Ashish Patwala, Lluís Mont, Archana Rao, Hartwig Retzlaff, Christophe Garweg, Anthony G Gallagher, Tom Verbelen
{"title":"Surgical Skill Simulation Training to Proficiency Reduces Procedural Errors among Novice Cardiac Device Implanters. A Randomized Study","authors":"Jorio Mascheroni, Martin Stockburger, Ashish Patwala, Lluís Mont, Archana Rao, Hartwig Retzlaff, Christophe Garweg, Anthony G Gallagher, Tom Verbelen","doi":"10.1093/europace/euae229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aims In cardiac device implantation, having both surgical skills and ability to manipulate catheter/lead/wire is crucial. Few cardiologists, however, receive formal surgical training prior to implanting. Skills are mostly acquired directly on-the-job and surgical technique varies across institutions; suboptimal approaches may increase complications. We investigated how novel proficiency-based progression (PBP) simulation training impacts the surgical quality of implantations, compared to traditional simulation (SIM) training. Methods In this international prospective study, novice implanters were randomized (blinded) 1:1 to participate in a simulation-based procedure training curriculum, with proficiency demonstration requirements for advancing (PBP approach) or without (SIM). Ultimately, trainees performed the surgical tasks of an implant on a porcine tissue which was video-recorded and then scored by two independent assessors (blinded to group), using previously validated performance metrics. Primary outcomes were the number of procedural Steps Completed, Critical Errors, Errors (non-critical) and All Errors Combined. Results Thirty novice implanters from 10 countries participated. Baseline experiences were similar between groups. Compared to SIM-trained, the PBP-trained group completed on average 11% more procedural Steps (p<0.001) and made 61.2% fewer Critical Errors (p<0.001), 57.1% fewer Errors (p=0.140), 60.7% fewer All Errors Combined (p=0.001); 11/15 (73%) PBP-trainees demonstrated the predefined target performance level vs 3/15 SIM-trainees (20%) in the video-recorded performance. Conclusions PBP training produces superior objectively assessed novice operators’ surgical performance in device implantation compared with traditional (simulation) training. Systematic PBP incorporation into formal academic surgical skills training is recommended before in-vivo device practice. Future studies will quantify PBP training’s effect on surgery-related device complications.","PeriodicalId":11720,"journal":{"name":"EP Europace","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EP Europace","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euae229","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims In cardiac device implantation, having both surgical skills and ability to manipulate catheter/lead/wire is crucial. Few cardiologists, however, receive formal surgical training prior to implanting. Skills are mostly acquired directly on-the-job and surgical technique varies across institutions; suboptimal approaches may increase complications. We investigated how novel proficiency-based progression (PBP) simulation training impacts the surgical quality of implantations, compared to traditional simulation (SIM) training. Methods In this international prospective study, novice implanters were randomized (blinded) 1:1 to participate in a simulation-based procedure training curriculum, with proficiency demonstration requirements for advancing (PBP approach) or without (SIM). Ultimately, trainees performed the surgical tasks of an implant on a porcine tissue which was video-recorded and then scored by two independent assessors (blinded to group), using previously validated performance metrics. Primary outcomes were the number of procedural Steps Completed, Critical Errors, Errors (non-critical) and All Errors Combined. Results Thirty novice implanters from 10 countries participated. Baseline experiences were similar between groups. Compared to SIM-trained, the PBP-trained group completed on average 11% more procedural Steps (p<0.001) and made 61.2% fewer Critical Errors (p<0.001), 57.1% fewer Errors (p=0.140), 60.7% fewer All Errors Combined (p=0.001); 11/15 (73%) PBP-trainees demonstrated the predefined target performance level vs 3/15 SIM-trainees (20%) in the video-recorded performance. Conclusions PBP training produces superior objectively assessed novice operators’ surgical performance in device implantation compared with traditional (simulation) training. Systematic PBP incorporation into formal academic surgical skills training is recommended before in-vivo device practice. Future studies will quantify PBP training’s effect on surgery-related device complications.
通过手术技能模拟训练提高熟练程度可减少心脏设备植入新手的手术错误。随机研究
目的 在心脏设备植入过程中,掌握外科手术技能和操作导管/导联/导线的能力至关重要。然而,很少有心脏病专家在植入前接受过正规的外科培训。大部分技能都是在工作中直接获得的,不同机构的手术技巧也不尽相同;不理想的方法可能会增加并发症。与传统的模拟 (SIM) 培训相比,我们研究了新的基于熟练程度的进展 (PBP) 模拟培训如何影响植入手术的质量。方法 在这项国际前瞻性研究中,新手植入者以 1:1 的比例随机(盲法)参加基于模拟程序的培训课程,其中包括晋级(PBP 方法)或不晋级(SIM)的熟练演示要求。最终,受训者在猪组织上完成了植入手术任务,视频被录制下来,然后由两名独立评估员(对组别保密)使用之前验证过的性能指标进行评分。主要结果是完成的程序步骤数、关键错误、错误(非关键)和所有错误的总和。结果 来自 10 个国家的 30 名新手参加了此次活动。各组的基线经验相似。与 SIM 培训相比,PBP 培训组平均多完成 11% 的程序步骤(p<0.001),少犯 61.2% 的关键错误(p<0.001),少犯 57.1% 的错误(p=0.140),少犯 60.7% 的综合错误(p=0.001);11/15(73%)名 PBP 培训学员在视频录制的表演中达到了预定的目标表演水平,而 SIM 培训学员只有 3/15(20%)名达到了预定的目标表演水平。结论 与传统(模拟)培训相比,PBP 培训在客观评估新手操作者的器械植入手术表现方面更胜一筹。建议在体内设备实践前将 PBP 系统纳入正规的外科技能培训。未来的研究将量化 PBP 培训对手术相关器械并发症的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信