Impact of laparoscopic training course for surgical trainees based on an evidence-based pedagogical framework: randomized trial.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
BJS Open Pub Date : 2024-09-03 DOI:10.1093/bjsopen/zrae109
Ruijun Pan, Xueliang Zhou, Chao Wu, Luyang Zhang, Jiayu Wang, Minhua Zheng, Ting Shi, Wei Cai, Jing Sun
{"title":"Impact of laparoscopic training course for surgical trainees based on an evidence-based pedagogical framework: randomized trial.","authors":"Ruijun Pan, Xueliang Zhou, Chao Wu, Luyang Zhang, Jiayu Wang, Minhua Zheng, Ting Shi, Wei Cai, Jing Sun","doi":"10.1093/bjsopen/zrae109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The 'Learn, See, Practice, Prove, Do, Maintain' (LSPPDM) pedagogical framework is an evidence-based framework developed through a careful review and synthesis of the literature. The purpose of the study was to explore the effectiveness and applicability of the LSPPDM pedagogical framework in the laparoscopic training course for surgical residents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prospective study of surgical residents who underwent standardized surgical residency training in a single institution from December 2020 to December 2022. Trainees were randomized to either the pedagogical group (6-step LSPPDM pedagogical framework) or traditional group (2-step traditional approach with twice-weekly lectures and a weekly laparoscopic operating skills session). The Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills scale was used for technical skills, and the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons assessment form was used for non-technical skills.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty trainees were randomized. The pedagogical group scored higher on subjective perception (P < 0.050) and the theoretical assessment (mean(s.d.) 41.83(6.66)) than those in the traditional group (37.83(5.77)) (P = 0.016). Trainees in the pedagogical group took less time to complete the assessment of models, had fewer failures and higher scores, took less time to complete laparoscopic sutures and knots, showed better proficiency with laparoscopic instruments, and completed at higher quality (P < 0.050). Trainees performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy in animal models demonstrated higher technical and non-technical skill scores in the pedagogical group (P < 0.050). 'Tissue handling' and 'Decision making' were common areas for improvement for both groups of trainees.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The LSPPDM pedagogical framework is feasible and demonstrated improvements in technical and non-technical skills in surgical trainees compared to a traditional training programme.</p>","PeriodicalId":9028,"journal":{"name":"BJS Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11426165/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJS Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrae109","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The 'Learn, See, Practice, Prove, Do, Maintain' (LSPPDM) pedagogical framework is an evidence-based framework developed through a careful review and synthesis of the literature. The purpose of the study was to explore the effectiveness and applicability of the LSPPDM pedagogical framework in the laparoscopic training course for surgical residents.

Methods: Prospective study of surgical residents who underwent standardized surgical residency training in a single institution from December 2020 to December 2022. Trainees were randomized to either the pedagogical group (6-step LSPPDM pedagogical framework) or traditional group (2-step traditional approach with twice-weekly lectures and a weekly laparoscopic operating skills session). The Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills scale was used for technical skills, and the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons assessment form was used for non-technical skills.

Results: Sixty trainees were randomized. The pedagogical group scored higher on subjective perception (P < 0.050) and the theoretical assessment (mean(s.d.) 41.83(6.66)) than those in the traditional group (37.83(5.77)) (P = 0.016). Trainees in the pedagogical group took less time to complete the assessment of models, had fewer failures and higher scores, took less time to complete laparoscopic sutures and knots, showed better proficiency with laparoscopic instruments, and completed at higher quality (P < 0.050). Trainees performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy in animal models demonstrated higher technical and non-technical skill scores in the pedagogical group (P < 0.050). 'Tissue handling' and 'Decision making' were common areas for improvement for both groups of trainees.

Conclusions: The LSPPDM pedagogical framework is feasible and demonstrated improvements in technical and non-technical skills in surgical trainees compared to a traditional training programme.

基于循证教学框架的外科学员腹腔镜培训课程的影响:随机试验。
背景:学习、观察、实践、证明、操作、保持"(LSPPDM)教学框架是通过对文献的仔细回顾和综合而制定的循证框架。本研究旨在探讨 LSPPDM 教学框架在外科住院医师腹腔镜培训课程中的有效性和适用性:方法:对 2020 年 12 月至 2022 年 12 月期间在一家机构接受标准化外科住院医师培训的外科住院医师进行前瞻性研究。学员被随机分配到教学组(6 步 LSPPDM 教学框架)或传统组(2 步传统方法,每周两次讲座,每周一次腹腔镜操作技能课程)。技术技能采用全球腹腔镜技能操作评估量表,非技术技能采用外科医生非技术技能评估表:对 60 名学员进行了随机分组。教学组在主观感受(P < 0.050)和理论评估(平均值(s.d. )41.83(6.66))方面的得分高于传统组(37.83(5.77))(P = 0.016)。教学组学员完成模型评估的时间更短,失败次数更少,得分更高,完成腹腔镜缝合和打结的时间更短,腹腔镜器械使用更熟练,完成质量更高(P < 0.050)。在动物模型中进行腹腔镜胆囊切除术的学员在教学组的技术和非技术技能得分更高(P < 0.050)。组织处理 "和 "决策制定 "是两组学员共同需要改进的地方:结论:LSPPDM 教学框架是可行的,与传统的培训计划相比,它提高了外科学员的技术和非技术技能。
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
BJS Open
BJS Open SURGERY-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.20%
发文量
144
×
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