ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
General surgery residents have better technical skills and less stress performing complex drills in open fashion over robotic approach.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDespite growing diversity of surgical approaches, surgical residents must learn the breadth of general surgery in a finite time. Accordingly, there is increasing demand for the development of standardized, proficiency-based training curricula to help teach novice surgeons the necessary technical skills quickly. The aim of this study was to evaluate resident performance and opinion of an open versus robotic approach after completion of a robotic training curriculum.
methodsFrom 2019 to 2022, PGY-3 general surgery residents completed a two-week dedicated robotic simulation curriculum, which included open and robotic interrupted hepaticojejunostomy (IHJ) and pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) drills on biotissue models. The drills were recorded and graded according to the modified Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) by two independent blinded graders, in addition to time duration. The primary outcomes were OSATS score and drill duration. Mental demand was assessed using the NASA Task Load Index (TLX), Borg Exertion Scale, and Edwards Arousal Rating.
resultsTwenty-three residents participated in the study. For IHJ drills, residents had higher OSATS scores (p = 0.0297) and were faster (p < 0.0001) with an open approach. A similar trend was observed for PJ drills, with higher OSATS scores and shorter time duration with an open approach. However, there was no significant difference in NASA-TLX, Borg Exertion Scale, or Edwards Arousal Rating for robotic IHJ compared to open. The residents endorsed higher NASA-TLX scores for robotic PJ. 100% of the residents viewed open training as extremely important, while 73.9% reported the same for robotic training.
conclusionPGY-3 surgical residents have greater comfort and skill with open techniques compared to robotic. This may be due to lack of robotic exposure early in surgical training, as opposed to open technique which is established early in residency. More deliberate integration of robotic training into residency is necessary for residents to catch up to open techniques.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40227486What 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.