Adaptation of the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery box for endoscopic simulation: performance evaluation of the first 100 participants.
Endoscopy simulator
FES
FLS
GAGES
Simulation
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2019
10 2019
Historique:
received:
21
04
2018
accepted:
03
12
2018
pubmed:
4
1
2019
medline:
19
5
2020
entrez:
4
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The paucity of readily accessible, cost-effective models for the simulation, practice, and evaluation of endoscopic skills present an ongoing barrier for resident training. We have previously described a system for conversion of the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery box (FLS) for flexible endoscopic simulation. Six endoscopic tasks focusing on scope manipulation, and other clinically relevant endoscopic skills are performed within a 5-min time limit per task. This study describes our experience and validation results with the first 100 participants. A total of 100 participants were evaluated on the simulator. Thirty individuals were classified as experts (having done over 200 endoscopic procedures), and 70 were classified as trainees (39 individuals reported having no prior endoscopy experience). Of the 100 participants, 55 individuals were retested on the simulator within a period of 4 months. These 55 individuals were also evaluated using the "Global Assessment of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Skills" (GAGES). T-tests and Pearson correlations were used where appropriate, values less than 0.05 were considered significant. Experts completed all six tasks significantly faster than trainees. For the 55 participants who were retested on the simulator, all tasks demonstrated evidence of test-retest reliability for both experts and trainees who did not practice in between tests. Moderate correlations between lower completion times and higher GAGES scores were observed for all tasks except the clipping task. The results from the first 100 participants provide evidence for the simulator's validity. Based on task completion times, we found that experts perform significantly better than trainees. Additionally, preliminary data demonstrate evidence of test-retest reliability, as well as GAGES score correlation. Additional studies to determine and validate a scoring system for this simulator are ongoing.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The paucity of readily accessible, cost-effective models for the simulation, practice, and evaluation of endoscopic skills present an ongoing barrier for resident training. We have previously described a system for conversion of the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery box (FLS) for flexible endoscopic simulation. Six endoscopic tasks focusing on scope manipulation, and other clinically relevant endoscopic skills are performed within a 5-min time limit per task. This study describes our experience and validation results with the first 100 participants.
METHODS
A total of 100 participants were evaluated on the simulator. Thirty individuals were classified as experts (having done over 200 endoscopic procedures), and 70 were classified as trainees (39 individuals reported having no prior endoscopy experience). Of the 100 participants, 55 individuals were retested on the simulator within a period of 4 months. These 55 individuals were also evaluated using the "Global Assessment of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Skills" (GAGES). T-tests and Pearson correlations were used where appropriate, values less than 0.05 were considered significant.
RESULTS
Experts completed all six tasks significantly faster than trainees. For the 55 participants who were retested on the simulator, all tasks demonstrated evidence of test-retest reliability for both experts and trainees who did not practice in between tests. Moderate correlations between lower completion times and higher GAGES scores were observed for all tasks except the clipping task.
CONCLUSIONS
The results from the first 100 participants provide evidence for the simulator's validity. Based on task completion times, we found that experts perform significantly better than trainees. Additionally, preliminary data demonstrate evidence of test-retest reliability, as well as GAGES score correlation. Additional studies to determine and validate a scoring system for this simulator are ongoing.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30604259
doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-06617-6
pii: 10.1007/s00464-018-06617-6
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3444-3450Références
Surg Endosc. 2008 Jan;22(1):158-62
pubmed: 17516114
Gastrointest Endosc. 2008 Apr;67(4):683-9
pubmed: 18279862
Am Surg. 2008 Feb;74(2):187-8
pubmed: 18306878
Surg Endosc. 2010 Aug;24(8):1834-41
pubmed: 20112113
Surg Endosc. 2011 Sep;25(9):2980-6
pubmed: 21487880
Endoscopy. 2014 Sep;46(9):735-44
pubmed: 24770972
J Surg Educ. 2014 Nov-Dec;71(6):846-50
pubmed: 24981656
Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Apr;81(4):967-73
pubmed: 25310934
Surg Innov. 2016 Apr;23(2):183-8
pubmed: 26337331
Surg Endosc. 2017 Oct;31(10):4010-4015
pubmed: 28229238
Surg Endosc. 2018 Jan;32(1):413-420
pubmed: 28698900
Surg Endosc. 2018 Mar;32(3):1397-1404
pubmed: 28812161
Surg Endosc. 2018 Jun;32(6):2968-2983
pubmed: 29611046