技术技能众包评估(C-SATS)平台在外科手术中的价值:证据的系统回顾

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Tommaselli Giovanni A, Sehat Alvand J, Ricketts Crystal D, Ć. W., Grange Philippe
{"title":"技术技能众包评估(C-SATS)平台在外科手术中的价值:证据的系统回顾","authors":"Tommaselli Giovanni A, Sehat Alvand J, Ricketts Crystal D, Ć. W., Grange Philippe","doi":"10.33425/2689-1093.1047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Crowd-Sourced Assessment of Technical Skills (C-SATS) is a surgical data management and learning platform that leverages the knowledge of large expert surgeon and lay groups to assess the technique and technical skills of surgeons in a highly efficient manner. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize published literature on the performance of C-SATS as compared to expert evaluations and assess its use as a training and validation tool in minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed per PRISMA guidelines using the Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar databases on published studies that evaluated the use of C-SATS following MIS, such as laparoscopic or robotic-assisted surgery. Results: A total of 21 reports were included in the review. Twelve studies comparing crowd-sourcing evaluations against expert opinion indicated overall excellent or good correlation with Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS), Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS), and Robotic Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (R-OSATS) scores, with correlation coefficients (Pearson or Spearman) ranging from 0.69 to 0.95 and reliability index (Cronbach’s alpha) from 0.63 to 0.93 across different specialties and surgical approaches. When using C-SATS to assess performance and validation, assessments positively correlated with traditional methods of time and error-based scoring and global rating scale. Conclusions: Based on the current published literature, the C-SATS platform has been shown to efficiently provide crowd-sourced evaluations that correlate favorably with expert evaluation across a range of surgical specialties and approaches. Use of crowdsourcing has uniformly yielded accurate evaluations of surgeons’ technical skills in a markedly shorter time than expert reviews. C-SATS may be a cost-effective complement or alternative to traditional models of evaluating surgical proficiency. Future studies are needed to determine whether the use of C-SATS will lead to improved surgical performance and patient outcomes.","PeriodicalId":12222,"journal":{"name":"European Surgical Research","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Value of the Crowd-Sourced Assessment of Technical Skills (C-SATS) Platform in Surgical Procedures: A Systematic Review of Evidence\",\"authors\":\"Tommaselli Giovanni A, Sehat Alvand J, Ricketts Crystal D, Ć. W., Grange Philippe\",\"doi\":\"10.33425/2689-1093.1047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Crowd-Sourced Assessment of Technical Skills (C-SATS) is a surgical data management and learning platform that leverages the knowledge of large expert surgeon and lay groups to assess the technique and technical skills of surgeons in a highly efficient manner. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize published literature on the performance of C-SATS as compared to expert evaluations and assess its use as a training and validation tool in minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed per PRISMA guidelines using the Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar databases on published studies that evaluated the use of C-SATS following MIS, such as laparoscopic or robotic-assisted surgery. Results: A total of 21 reports were included in the review. Twelve studies comparing crowd-sourcing evaluations against expert opinion indicated overall excellent or good correlation with Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS), Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS), and Robotic Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (R-OSATS) scores, with correlation coefficients (Pearson or Spearman) ranging from 0.69 to 0.95 and reliability index (Cronbach’s alpha) from 0.63 to 0.93 across different specialties and surgical approaches. When using C-SATS to assess performance and validation, assessments positively correlated with traditional methods of time and error-based scoring and global rating scale. Conclusions: Based on the current published literature, the C-SATS platform has been shown to efficiently provide crowd-sourced evaluations that correlate favorably with expert evaluation across a range of surgical specialties and approaches. Use of crowdsourcing has uniformly yielded accurate evaluations of surgeons’ technical skills in a markedly shorter time than expert reviews. C-SATS may be a cost-effective complement or alternative to traditional models of evaluating surgical proficiency. Future studies are needed to determine whether the use of C-SATS will lead to improved surgical performance and patient outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12222,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Surgical Research\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Surgical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33425/2689-1093.1047\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Surgical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33425/2689-1093.1047","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:C-SATS (Crowd-Sourced Assessment of Technical Skills)是一个外科数据管理和学习平台,利用大型专家外科医生和非专业群体的知识,高效地评估外科医生的技术和技能。本系统综述的目的是总结已发表的关于C-SATS性能的文献,并将其与专家评估相比较,并评估其作为微创手术(MIS)培训和验证工具的用途。方法:根据PRISMA指南,使用Medline, Embase和Google Scholar数据库对已发表的研究进行全面的文献检索,这些研究评估了MIS后C-SATS的使用,如腹腔镜或机器人辅助手术。结果:共纳入21篇报道。12项比较众包评估与专家意见的研究表明,总体上与腹腔镜技能全局手术评估(GOALS)、机器人技能全局评估评估(GEARS)和机器人客观结构化技术技能评估(R-OSATS)得分的相关性良好或良好。不同专科和手术入路的相关系数(Pearson或Spearman)在0.69 ~ 0.95之间,可靠性指数(Cronbach’s alpha)在0.63 ~ 0.93之间。当使用C-SATS评估性能和验证时,评估与传统的基于时间和错误的评分方法和全局评分量表呈正相关。结论:根据目前发表的文献,C-SATS平台已被证明可以有效地提供众包评估,与一系列外科专科和手术方法的专家评估相关联。与专家评估相比,使用众包技术可以在更短的时间内对外科医生的技术技能做出准确的评估。C-SATS可能是评估手术熟练程度的传统模型的一种具有成本效益的补充或替代方法。需要进一步的研究来确定使用C-SATS是否会改善手术效果和患者预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Value of the Crowd-Sourced Assessment of Technical Skills (C-SATS) Platform in Surgical Procedures: A Systematic Review of Evidence
Background: Crowd-Sourced Assessment of Technical Skills (C-SATS) is a surgical data management and learning platform that leverages the knowledge of large expert surgeon and lay groups to assess the technique and technical skills of surgeons in a highly efficient manner. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize published literature on the performance of C-SATS as compared to expert evaluations and assess its use as a training and validation tool in minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed per PRISMA guidelines using the Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar databases on published studies that evaluated the use of C-SATS following MIS, such as laparoscopic or robotic-assisted surgery. Results: A total of 21 reports were included in the review. Twelve studies comparing crowd-sourcing evaluations against expert opinion indicated overall excellent or good correlation with Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS), Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS), and Robotic Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (R-OSATS) scores, with correlation coefficients (Pearson or Spearman) ranging from 0.69 to 0.95 and reliability index (Cronbach’s alpha) from 0.63 to 0.93 across different specialties and surgical approaches. When using C-SATS to assess performance and validation, assessments positively correlated with traditional methods of time and error-based scoring and global rating scale. Conclusions: Based on the current published literature, the C-SATS platform has been shown to efficiently provide crowd-sourced evaluations that correlate favorably with expert evaluation across a range of surgical specialties and approaches. Use of crowdsourcing has uniformly yielded accurate evaluations of surgeons’ technical skills in a markedly shorter time than expert reviews. C-SATS may be a cost-effective complement or alternative to traditional models of evaluating surgical proficiency. Future studies are needed to determine whether the use of C-SATS will lead to improved surgical performance and patient outcomes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ''European Surgical Research'' features original clinical and experimental papers, condensed reviews of new knowledge relevant to surgical research, and short technical notes serving the information needs of investigators in various fields of operative medicine. Coverage includes surgery, surgical pathophysiology, drug usage, and new surgical techniques. Special consideration is given to information on the use of animal models, physiological and biological methods as well as biophysical measuring and recording systems. The journal is of particular value for workers interested in pathophysiologic concepts, new techniques and in how these can be introduced into clinical work or applied when critical decisions are made concerning the use of new procedures or drugs.
×
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