Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37219784›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2023

Intentional enterotomies: validation of a novel robotic surgery training exercise.

Robert B Laverty, Mustafa T Khan, Ronit Patnaik, Christina S Lee, Cassandra D Leonardo, Robert W Krell, Mamie C Stull

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Robert B Laverty *Department of Surgery, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4092-5660
Mustafa T Khan *Department of General Surgery, Long School of Medicine, University of Texas Health San Antonio, 7703 Floyd Curl Drive, San Antonio, TX, 78229-3900, USA. khanm1@uthscsa.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5430-7572
Ronit PatnaikDepartment of General Surgery, Long School of Medicine, University of Texas Health San Antonio, 7703 Floyd Curl Drive, San Antonio, TX, 78229-3900, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4288-7896
Christina S LeeDepartment of Surgery, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7048-5806
Cassandra D LeonardoDepartment of General Surgery, Long School of Medicine, University of Texas Health San Antonio, 7703 Floyd Curl Drive, San Antonio, TX, 78229-3900, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5637-7112
Robert W KrellDepartment of Surgery, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4800-3123
Mamie C StullDepartment of Surgery, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6161-0273
Brooke Army Medical Center · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While laparoscopic simulation-based training is a well-established component of general surgery training, no such requirement or standardized curriculum exists for robotic surgery. Furthermore, there is a lack of high-fidelity electrocautery simulation training exercises in the literature. Using Messick's validity framework, we sought to determine the content, response process, internal content and construct validity of a novel inanimate tissue model that utilizes electrocautery for potential incorporation in such curricula. A multi-institutional, prospective study involving medical students (MS) and general surgery residents (PGY1-3) was conducted. Participants performed an exercise using a biotissue bowel model on the da Vinci Xi robotic console during which they created an enterotomy using electrocautery, followed by approximation with interrupted sutures. Participant performance was recorded and then scored by crowd-sourced assessors of technical skill, along with three of the authors. Construct validity was determined via difference in Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) score, time to completion, and total number of errors between the two cohorts. Upon completion of the exercise, participants were surveyed on their perception of the exercise and its impact on their robotic training to determine content validity. 31 participants were enrolled and separated into two cohorts: MS + PGY1 vs. PGY2-3. Time spent on the robotic trainer (0.8 vs. 8.13 h, p = 0.002), number of bedside robotic assists (5.7 vs. 14.8, p < 0.001), and number of robotic cases as primary surgeon (0.3 vs. 13.1, p < 0.001) were statistically significant between the two groups. Differences in GEARS scores (18.5 vs. 19.9, p = 0.001), time to completion (26.1 vs. 14.4 min, p < 0.001), and total errors (21.5 vs. 11.9, p = 0.018) between the groups were statistically significant as well. Of the 23 participants that completed the post-exercise survey, 87% and 91.3% reported improvement in robotic surgical ability and confidence, respectively. On a 10-point Likert scale, respondents rated the realism of the exercise 7.5, educational benefit 9.1, and effectiveness in teaching robotic skills 8.7. Controlling for the upfront investment of certain training materials, each exercise iteration cost ~ $30. This study confirmed the content, response process, internal structure and construct validity of a novel, high-fidelity and cost-effective inanimate tissue exercise which successfully incorporates electrocautery. Consideration should be given to its addition to robotic surgery training programs.

Indexed as

RoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresSimulation TrainingClinical CompetenceComputer SimulationCurriculumHumansProspective StudiesElectrocauteryMedical simulationRobotic surgeryRobotic training

Identifiers

PMID37219784
OpenAlexW4377564869

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.