Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques

, Volume 17, Issue 9, pp 1468–1471

PicSOr: An objective test of perceptual skill that predicts laparoscopic technical skill in three initial studies of laparoscopopic performance

  • A. G. Gallagher
  • R. Cowie
  • I. Crothers
  • J. -A. Jordan-Black
  • R. M. Satava
Original article

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopic surgery requires surgeons to infer the shape of 3-D structures, such as the internal organs of patients, from 2-D displays on a video monitor. Recent evidence indicates that the issue is not resolved by the use of contemporary 3-D camera systems. It is therefore crucial to find ways of measuring differences in aptitude for recovering 3-D structure from 2-D images, and assessing its impact on performance. Our aim was to test empirically for a relationship between laparoscopic ability and the perceptual skill of recovering information about 3-D structures from 2-D monitor displays. Methods: Participants in three studies completed a simulated laparoscopic cutting task as well as the Pictorial Surface Orientation (PicSOr)3 Test. In studies 1 (n = 48) and 2 (n = 32) both groups were laparoscopic novices, and in study 3 (n = 34) 18 of the participants were experienced laparoscopic surgeons. Findings: All three studies showed that PicSOr consistently predicted the laparoscopic performance of participants on the laparoscopic cutting task (study 1, r = 0.5, p < 0.0003; study 2, r = 0.5, p < 0.004; and study 3, r = 0.42, p = 0.017). Furthermore, it was also a significant predictor of laparoscopic surgeons’ performance (r = 0.54, p = 0.047). Interpretations: This is the first objective perceptual psychometric test to reliably predict laparoscopic technical skills. PicSOr provides a tool for assessing which trainees have the potential to learn minimal access surgery.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Berguer, R 1996Ergonomics in the operating theatre.Am J Surg171385386CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Birkett, DH 1995Three-dimensional laparoscopy.J Laparoendosc Surg.327331Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cowie, R 1998Measurement and modelling of perceived slant in surfaces represented by freely viewed line drawings.Perception27505540PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Crothers, I, Gallagher, AG, McClure, N, James, D, McGuigan, J 1999Experienced surgeons are automated to the fulcrum effect: An ergonomic demonstration.Endoscopy31365369CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Darzi, A, Smith, S, Taffinder, N 1999Assessing operative skill.Br Med J318887Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Editorial1991Cholecystectomy practice transformed.Lancet338789790Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gallagher, AG, McClure, N, McGuigan, J, Crothers, I, Browning, J 1999Virtual reality training in laparoscopic surgery: a preliminary assessment of Minimally Invasive Surgical Trainer Virtual Reality (MIST VR)Endoscopy31310313CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gallagher, AG, McClure, N, McGuigan, J, Ritchie, K, Sheehy, NP 1998An ergonomic analysis of the “Fulcrum Effect” in endoscopic skill acquisition.Endoscopy30617620PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gallagher, AG, McGuigan, J, Ritchie, K, McClure, N 2001Objective psychomotor assessment of senior, junior and novice laparoscopists with virtual reality.World J Surg2514781483PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hagen, MA 1980The Perception of Pictures, vols 1–2.Academic PressNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hanna, GB, Shimi, SM, Cuschieri, A 1998Randomised study of influence of two-dimensional versus three-dimensional imaging on performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Lancet351248251CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Miller, RJ 1973Cross-cultural research in the perception of pictorial materials.Psych Bull80135150Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Reinhardt-Rutland, AH, Gallagher, AG 1996

    Visual depth perception in minimally invasive surgery.

    Robertson, SA eds. Contemporary Ergonomics. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Society, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK, 10–12 April 1996.Taylor and FrancisLondon, UK531536
    Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Southern Surgeons Club1995The learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Am J Surg1705559CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Taffinder, N, McManus, I, Russell, R, Darzi, A 1998An objective assessment of laparoscopic surgeons’ psychomotor skills: Validation of the MIST VR laparoscopic simulator.Br J Surg8575Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wherry, DC, Rob, CG, Marohn, MR, Rich, NM 1994An external audit of laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed in medical treatment facilities of the Department of Defence.Ann Surg220626634PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. G. Gallagher
    • 1
  • R. Cowie
    • 1
  • I. Crothers
    • 1
  • J. -A. Jordan-Black
    • 1
  • R. M. Satava
    • 2
  1. 1.Queen’s University Endoscopic Research LaboratoryQueen’s University of Belfast, IrelandUnited Kingdom
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WAUSA

Personalised recommendations