ArticleJournal of surgical education2024
Competency in Robotic Surgery: Standard Setting for Robotic Suturing Using Objective Assessment and Expert Evaluation.
Article in Journal of surgical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSurgical skill assessment tools such as the End-to-End Assessment of Suturing Expertise (EASE) can differentiate a surgeon's experience level. In this simulation-based study, we define a competency benchmark for intraoperative robotic suturing using EASE as a validated measure of performance.
designParticipants conducted a dry-lab vesicourethral anastomosis (VUA) exercise. Videos were each independently scored by 2 trained, blinded reviewers using EASE. Inter-rater reliability was measured with prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted Kappa (PABAK) using 2 example videos. All videos were reviewed by an expert surgeon, who determined if the suturing skills exhibited were at a competency level expected for residency graduation (pass or fail). The Contrasting Group (CG) method was then used to set a pass/fail score at the intercept of the pass and fail cohorts' EASE score distributions.
settingKeck School of Medicine, University of Southern California.
participantsTwenty-six participants: 8 medical students, 8 junior residents (PGY 1-2), 7 senior residents (PGY 3-5) and 3 attending urologists.
resultsAfter 1 round of consensus-building, average PABAK across EASE subskills was 0.90 (Range 0.67-1.0). The CG method produced a competency benchmark EASE score of >35/39, with a pass rate of 10/26 (38%); 27% were deemed competent by expert evaluation. False positives and negatives were defined as medical students who passed and attendings who failed the assessment, respectively. This pass/fail score produced no false positives or negatives, and fewer JR than SR were considered competent by both the expert and CG benchmark.
conclusionsUsing an absolute standard setting method, competency scores were set to identify trainees who could competently execute a standardized dry-lab robotic suturing exercise. This standard can be used for high stakes decisions regarding a trainee's technical readiness for independent practice. Future work includes validation of this standard in the clinical environment through correlation with clinical outcomes.
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.