Can all surgical trainees be trained to proficiency for a robotic urethro-vesical anastomotic task using a chicken model? A prospective, randomized trial.

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Stefano Puliatti, Marco Amato, Marco Ticonosco, Rui Farinha, Ruben De Groote, Laura Langhendries, Maxime Lassel, Ahmed Eissa, Ben VAN Cleynenbreugel, Elio Mazzone, Stefania Ferretti, Salvatore Micali, Giampaolo Bianchi, Alexandre Mottrie, Anthony G Gallagher
{"title":"Can all surgical trainees be trained to proficiency for a robotic urethro-vesical anastomotic task using a chicken model? A prospective, randomized trial.","authors":"Stefano Puliatti, Marco Amato, Marco Ticonosco, Rui Farinha, Ruben De Groote, Laura Langhendries, Maxime Lassel, Ahmed Eissa, Ben VAN Cleynenbreugel, Elio Mazzone, Stefania Ferretti, Salvatore Micali, Giampaolo Bianchi, Alexandre Mottrie, Anthony G Gallagher","doi":"10.23736/S2724-6051.25.06367-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Proficiency based progression (PBP) is a very effective method of training and has been adopted by the European Robotic Surgical Section (ERUS) for robotic skills training. No study has addressed whether all learners can be trained to the proficiency benchmark. In this study, we evaluated: 1) if all trainees reached a quantitatively defined proficiency benchmark for a robotic suturing and knot tying anastomosis task; and 2) the number of training trials required.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a multi-center, prospective, randomized, study, 48 participants were randomized to: 1) a PBP group that received e-learning on the ORSI chicken anastomosis task with the requirement to reach the proficiency benchmark before starting practical training; 2) e-learning group, received the exact same curriculum as group 1, but with no proficiency requirement on the e-learning; 3) traditional group received the exact same curriculum in face-to-face lectures; 4) the apprenticeship group received a conventional preparation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All participants, except five in group 4, demonstrated the proficiency benchmark. Group 1 took ~6 trials (~3 hours); group 2 required 14% longer, group 3, 103% (P<0.001) and in group 4, 58% of trainees demonstrated the benchmark but took 162% (P<0.001) longer. This was a small-scale but robust study with substantial effect sizes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All PBP trainees demonstrated the proficiency benchmark in comparison to 58% of conventional trained group. As adherence to the PBP methodology decreased, the efficiency of proficiency demonstration significantly reduced.</p>","PeriodicalId":53228,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.25.06367-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Proficiency based progression (PBP) is a very effective method of training and has been adopted by the European Robotic Surgical Section (ERUS) for robotic skills training. No study has addressed whether all learners can be trained to the proficiency benchmark. In this study, we evaluated: 1) if all trainees reached a quantitatively defined proficiency benchmark for a robotic suturing and knot tying anastomosis task; and 2) the number of training trials required.

Methods: In a multi-center, prospective, randomized, study, 48 participants were randomized to: 1) a PBP group that received e-learning on the ORSI chicken anastomosis task with the requirement to reach the proficiency benchmark before starting practical training; 2) e-learning group, received the exact same curriculum as group 1, but with no proficiency requirement on the e-learning; 3) traditional group received the exact same curriculum in face-to-face lectures; 4) the apprenticeship group received a conventional preparation.

Results: All participants, except five in group 4, demonstrated the proficiency benchmark. Group 1 took ~6 trials (~3 hours); group 2 required 14% longer, group 3, 103% (P<0.001) and in group 4, 58% of trainees demonstrated the benchmark but took 162% (P<0.001) longer. This was a small-scale but robust study with substantial effect sizes.

Conclusions: All PBP trainees demonstrated the proficiency benchmark in comparison to 58% of conventional trained group. As adherence to the PBP methodology decreased, the efficiency of proficiency demonstration significantly reduced.

所有的外科受训者都能熟练地训练机器人使用鸡模型进行尿道膀胱吻合术吗?一项前瞻性随机试验。
背景:基于熟练程度的进步(PBP)是一种非常有效的培训方法,已被欧洲机器人外科部门(ERUS)用于机器人技能培训。没有研究表明是否所有的学习者都能被训练到熟练程度基准。在这项研究中,我们评估了:1)如果所有的受训者都达到了机器人缝合和打结吻合任务的定量定义的熟练程度基准;2)所需的训练试验次数。方法:在一项多中心、前瞻性、随机研究中,48名参与者随机分为:1)PBP组接受ORSI鸡吻合任务的电子学习,要求在开始实践训练之前达到熟练基准;2)电子学习组,接受与第一组完全相同的课程,但没有对电子学习的熟练程度要求;3)传统组接受完全相同的面对面授课课程;4)学徒组接受常规准备。结果:除第4组5人外,其余被试均达到熟练基准。1组6次(3小时);结论:所有PBP学员均达到了熟练基准,而常规训练组的熟练基准为58%。随着对PBP方法的依从性降低,熟练程度证明的效率显著降低。
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
Minerva Urology and Nephrology
Minerva Urology and Nephrology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
32.70%
发文量
237
×
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