Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39090198›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024

Differences in coaching in single- versus dual-console robotic cases: a mixed-methods study.

Ananya Anand, Connie Gan, Rachel Jensen, James R Korndorffer

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

4 authors.

Ananya AnandDepartment of Surgery, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA. aa24@stanford.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9927-2417
Connie GanDepartment of Surgery, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.
Rachel JensenDepartment of Surgery, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.
James R KorndorfferDepartment of Surgery, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.

Funding

Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons 248705
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA growing importance has been placed on development of trainee robotic surgical skills through simulation curricula and intraoperative experience. However, few studies have examined how console case type impacts learning outcomes. We sought to evaluate how intraoperative coaching and resident autonomy differ based on the use of a single- versus dual-console robot.

methodsRobotic single- and dual-console cases from February to September 2023 at a single institution were included. Faculty and trainees wore microphones to capture audio during the case. Pre/post surveys were administered, which included metrics on faculty coaching based on the Wisconsin Surgical Coaching Rubric (WiSCoR) and on trainee technical performance based on the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS). Statistical analysis of survey data was performed using SPSS. Audio from cases was coded by 2 researchers with a deductive approach using WiSCoR as a framework.

resultsData were collected for 7 (38.9%) single and 11 (61.1%) dual-console cases across 9 case types from 4 surgical specialties. Chi-square analysis demonstrated no significant difference in percentage of case trainee spent in the operating surgeon role based on trainee level or console case type. Independent t-tests showed no significant difference in trainee autonomy, trainee performance, or faculty coaching scores based on console case type. Trainees rated faculty highest in WiSCoR Domains 1 (sharing responsibility) and 3 (providing constructive feedback). Qualitative analysis showed that for single-console cases, Domain 4 (goal setting) was most represented (34.0% of comments), while for dual-console cases, Domain 1 was most represented (37.0% of comments).

conclusionsQualitative analysis highlights that despite similar survey-based faculty ratings across domains, coaching on self-reflection (Domain 2) is infrequently done, highlighting an opportunity for improvement in this area of coaching during robotic surgery.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceInternship and ResidencyMentoringRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansMaleSimulation TrainingAutonomyCoachingFacultyRobotic surgerySurgical educationTrainees

Identifiers

PMID39090198

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.