Display options
Cite
Jokinen E, Mikkola TS, Härkki P. Effect of structural training on surgical outcomes of residents' first operative laparoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2019;33(11):3688-3695doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-06657-y.
Jokinen, E., Mikkola, T. S., & Härkki, P. (2019). Effect of structural training on surgical outcomes of residents' first operative laparoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Surgical endoscopy, 33(11), 3688-3695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-06657-y
Jokinen, Ewa, et al. "Effect of structural training on surgical outcomes of residents' first operative laparoscopy: a randomized controlled trial." Surgical endoscopy vol. 33,11 (2019): 3688-3695. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-06657-y
Jokinen E, Mikkola TS, Härkki P. Effect of structural training on surgical outcomes of residents' first operative laparoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2019 Nov;33(11):3688-3695. doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-06657-y. Epub 2019 Jan 17. PMID: 30656454; PMCID: PMC6795620.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Surg Endosc. 2019 Nov;33(11):3688-3695. doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-06657-y. Epub 2019 Jan 17.

Effect of structural training on surgical outcomes of residents' first operative laparoscopy: a randomized controlled trial.

Surgical endoscopy

Ewa Jokinen, Tomi S Mikkola, Päivi Härkki

Affiliations

  1. Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, P.O. Box 100, 00029 HUS, Helsinki, Finland. [email protected].
  2. Helsinki University Hospital, P.O. Box 100, 00029 HUS, Helsinki, Finland. [email protected].
  3. Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, P.O. Box 100, 00029 HUS, Helsinki, Finland.

PMID: 30656454 PMCID: PMC6795620 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-06657-y

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Gynecological surgery and resident education have changed during recent decades, thus impacting surgical training. Training on simulators must begin before operating on patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of a simple curriculum on the surgical outcome of the participants' first operative laparoscopy.

METHODS: This randomized prospective interventional study was carried out in Helsinki University Hospital and Hyvinkää Hospital. We recruited twenty junior residents in Obstetrics and Gynecology, of which half formed a control group and the rest completed the intervention with a theoretical and a practical part. The participants' first laparoscopic salpingectomy was assessed from video recordings by using Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) forms and the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). The surgical outcome and assessed scores were compared between the groups.

RESULTS: We found no differences in operative time, blood loss, or complications, nor in OSATS or NRS scores. In the intervention group, participants with the weakest performances in the simulator, seemed to benefit from the training program more than the participants with the best performances (skill level elevation 29.2-31.6% vs. 21.1-23.3%, respectively). The participants with the best performances in the simulator were scored among the best in the recorded operations as well.

CONCLUSION: In this study, we found no difference in the surgical outcome between the groups. However, the participants with low starting levels in the simulator could elevate their skill levels more, though they did not reach the skill level of those with a high starting level. Consequently, we found elevation in skills levels in the simulator tasks, but not in the surgical outcome. Likely, our simple training program with a fixed number of repetitions was insufficient to reach a plateau in the learning curve, and thus the training program in such a curriculum should be proficiency based.

Keywords: Resident education; Surgical education; Virtual simulator

References

  1. BJOG. 2008 Jun;115(7):908-16 - PubMed
  2. Lancet. 2001 Jan 27;357(9252):273-7 - PubMed
  3. J Grad Med Educ. 2015 Jun;7(2):197-202 - PubMed
  4. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014 Apr;93(4):359-66 - PubMed
  5. Arch Surg. 2009 Jan;144(1):77-82; discussion 82 - PubMed
  6. Ann Surg. 2006 Jun;243(6):854-60; discussion 860-3 - PubMed
  7. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2006 Jul;16(3):425-34 - PubMed
  8. JSLS. 2017 Jul-Sep;21(3):null - PubMed
  9. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014 May;125(2):181-5 - PubMed
  10. J Am Coll Surg. 2006 May;202(5):779-87 - PubMed
  11. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2006 Mar-Apr;13(2):126-33 - PubMed
  12. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016 Mar-Apr;23(3):372-7 - PubMed
  13. Int J Surg. 2011;9(8):659-61 - PubMed
  14. Br J Surg. 1997 Feb;84(2):273-8 - PubMed
  15. Ann Surg. 2007 Nov;246(5):771-9 - PubMed
  16. Br J Surg. 2004 Feb;91(2):146-50 - PubMed
  17. BMJ. 2009 May 14;338:b1802 - PubMed
  18. J Surg Educ. 2015 May-Jun;72(3):536-41 - PubMed
  19. J Surg Educ. 2017 Jul - Aug;74(4):717-723 - PubMed
  20. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Mar;121(3):578-84 - PubMed
  21. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014 Sep;180:1-7 - PubMed
  22. BMJ. 2008 May 17;336(7653):1129-31 - PubMed
  23. Fertil Steril. 2014 Sep;102(3):640-8 - PubMed
  24. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2008 Jul;28(5):474-7 - PubMed
  25. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Aug;215(2):204.e1-204.e11 - PubMed
  26. JSLS. 2015 Sep-Dec;19(4):null - PubMed
  27. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013 Oct;92(10):1194-201 - PubMed
  28. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2012 Sep;91(9):1015-28 - PubMed
  29. Surg Innov. 2007 Jun;14(2):107-12 - PubMed
  30. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Nov;197(5):541.e1-5 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types