ArticleBJS open2022
Intraoperative robotic-assisted low anterior rectal resection performance assessment using procedure-specific binary metrics and a global rating scale.
Article in BJS open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- European Society of Coloproctology guideline on training in robotic colorectal surgery (2024).Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024Guideline
- Evaluation of objective tools and artificial intelligence in robotic surgery technical skills assessment: a systematic review.The British journal of surgery · 2024Pooled it
- What are clinically relevant performance metrics in robotic surgery? A systematic review of the literature.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Robotic surgery for rectal cancer in 2026: a hierarchical appraisal of the evidence.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- International expert consensus on metric-based characterization of robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy (RATLH).Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Quantifying surgical complexity: how smoothness metrics vary in robotic cholecystectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Adoption and implementation of robotic colorectal surgery using structured training approach: an experience from tertiary referral center.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- ColoRobotica: Structured training in robotic colorectal surgery.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025Article
- International expert consensus on a structured approach to robotic multiport right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision and intracorporeal anastomosis.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025Article
- Objective assessment of intraoperative skills for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN).Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the use of binary metric-based (proficiency-based progression; PBP) performance assessments and global evaluative assessment of robotic skills (GEARS) of a robotic-assisted low anterior rectal resection (RA-LAR) procedure.
methodA prospective study of video analysis of RA-LAR procedures was carried out using the PBP metrics with binary parameters previously developed, and GEARS. Recordings were collected from five novice surgeons (≤30 RA-LAR previously performed) and seven experienced surgeons (>30 RA-LAR previously performed). Two consultant colorectal surgeons were trained to be assessors in the use of PBP binary parameters to evaluate the procedure phases, surgical steps, errors, and critical errors in male and female patients and GEARS scores. Novice and experienced surgeons were categorized and assessed using PBP metrics and GEARS; mean scores obtained were compared for statistical purpose. Also, the inter-rater reliability (IRR) of these assessment tools was evaluated.
resultsTwenty unedited recordings of RA-LAR procedures were blindly assessed. Overall, using PBP metric-based assessment, a subgroup of experienced surgeons made more errors (20 versus 16, P = 0.158) and critical errors (9.2 versus 7.8, P = 0.417) than the novice group, although not significantly. However, during the critical phase of RA-LAR, experienced surgeons made significantly fewer errors than the novice group (95% CI of the difference, Lower = 0.104 - Upper = 5.155, df = 11.9, t = 2.23, p = 0.042), and a similar pattern was observed for critical errors. The PBP metric and GEARS assessment tools distinguished between the objectively assessed performance of experienced and novice colorectal surgeons performing RA-LAR (total error scores with PBP metrics, P = 0.019-0.008; GEARS scores, P = 0.029-0.025). GEARS demonstrated poor IRR (mean IRR 0.49) and weaker discrimination between groups (15-41 per cent difference). PBP binary metrics demonstrated good IRR (mean 0.94) and robust discrimination particularly for total error scores (58-64 per cent).
conclusionsPBP binary metrics seem to be useful for metric-based training for surgeons learning RA-LAR procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.