Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 24, Issue 11, pp 2830–2834

Resident perceptions of advanced laparoscopic skills training

  • Vanessa N. Palter
  • Neil Orzech
  • Rajesh Aggarwal
  • Allan Okrainec
  • Teodor P. Grantcharov
Article

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study was to explore resident perceptions regarding four current models for teaching laparoscopic suturing and to assess the current quality of training in advanced minimally invasive surgical techniques at an academic teaching center.

Methods

This study included 14 senior general surgery residents (PGY 3-5) participating in a workshop in advanced laparoscopy. Four training tools were used in the course curriculum: the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) black box suturing model, a synthetic Nissen fundoplication model, a virtual reality (VR) simulator suturing task, and a porcine jejuno-jejunostomy model. After the workshop, residents were asked to complete a questionnaire relating to their experience with laparoscopic surgery, and their opinions regarding the four training models. Model rank was analyzed with one-way ANOVA, and χ2 analysis with Fisher’s exact test was used to analyze model effectiveness.

Results

The majority of residents had strong experience in basic laparoscopic cases such as cholecystectomy and appendectomy; however, few participants had experience in advanced cases. As a group, the residents ranked the porcine model first (average 1.6, median 1), followed by the synthetic Nissen model (average 2.0, median 2), the FLS model (average 2.5, median 3), and the VR trainer (average 3.2, median 4). Finally, each resident was asked to rate the four models individually with respect to their educational value. Scores were on a Likert scale from 1 to 5. Nine of 11 (81.8%) residents rated the animal model as “extremely helpful” while only 3 of 14 (21.4%) participants rated the VR model as “extremely helpful” (p = 0.048).

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that operative experience in advanced laparoscopy for senior residents is suboptimal. Residents learning this skill in a simulated environment prefer animal or video-trainers as teaching models rather than virtual reality. This has implications when designing a curriculum for advanced endoscopy.

Keywords

Education Training/courses Simulation Laparoscopic suturing Education 

References

  1. 1.
    Park A, Witzke D, Donnelly M (2002) Ongoing deficits in resident training for minimally invasive surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 6:501–509CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Levine RL, Kives S, Cathey G, Blinchevsky A, Acland R, Thompson C, Pasic R (2006) The use of lightly embalmed (fresh tissue) cadavers for resident laparoscopic training. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 13:451–456CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kanumuri P, Ganai S, Wohaibi EM, Bush RW, Grow D, Seymour NE (2008) Virtual reality and computer enhanced training devices equally improve laparoscopic surgical skill in novices. JSLS 12:219–226PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Van Sickle KR, Ritter EM, Baghai M, Goldenberg A, Huang IP, Gallagher AG, Smith CD (2008) Prospective, randomized, double-blind trial of curriculum-based training for intracorporeal suturing and knot tying. J Am Coll Surg 207:560–568CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Korndorffer JR, Dunne JB, Sierra R, Stefanidis D, Touchard CL, Scott DJ (2005) Simulator training for laparoscopic suturing using performance goals translates to the operating room. J Am Coll Surg 201:23–29CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Verdaasdonk EGG, Dankelman J, Lange JF, Stassen LPS (2008) Transfer validity of laparoscopic knot-tying training on a VR simulator to a realistic environment: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 22:1636–1642CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chang L, Petros J, Hess DT, Rotondi C, Babineau TJ (2007) Integrating simulation into a surgical residency program. Is voluntary participation effective? Surg Endosc 21:418–421CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Scott DJ, Bergen PC, Rege RV, Laycock R, Tesfay ST, Valentine RJ, Euhus DM, Jeyarajah DR, Thompson WM, Jones DB (2000) Laparoscopic training in bench models: better and more cost effective than operating room experience. J Am Coll Surg 191:272–283CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fried GM, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC, Fraser SA, Stanbridge D, Ghitulescu G, Andrew CG (2004) Proving the value of simulation in laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 240:518–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Villegas L, Schneider BE, Callery MP, Jones DB (2003) Laparoscopic skills training. Surg Endosc 17:1879–1888CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rattner DW, Apelgren KN, Eubancks WS (2001) The need for training opportunities in advanced laparoscopic surgery. The resident’s perspective. Surg Endosc 15:1066–1070CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hunter JG (2002) The case for fellowships in gastrointestinal and laparoendoscopic surgery. Surgery 132:523–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chaisson PM, Pace DE, Schlacta CM, Mamazza J, Poulin EC (2003) Minimally invasive surgery training in Canada. Surg Endosc 17:371–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aggarwal R, Hance J, Undre S, Ratnasothy J, Moorthy K, Chang A, Darzi A (2006) Training junior operative residents in laparoscopic suturing skills is feasible and efficacious. Surgery 139:729–734CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hammoud M, Nuthalapaty FS, Goepfert AR, Casey PM, Emmons S, Espey EL, Kaczmarczyk JM, Katz NT, Neutens JJ, Peskin EG (2008) To the point: medical education review of the role of simulators in surgical training. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199:338–343CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hamilton EC, Scott DJ, Fleming JB, Rege RV, Laycock R, Bergen PC, Tesfay ST, Jones DB (2002) Comparison of video trainer and virtual reality training systems on acquisition of technical skills. Surg Endosc 16:406–411CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grober ED, Hamstra SJ, Wnazel KR, Reznick R, Matsumoto ED, Sidhu RS, Jarvi KA (2004) The educational impact of bench model fidelity on the acquisition of technical skill. The use of clinically relevant outcome measures. Ann Surg 240:374–381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vanessa N. Palter
    • 1
  • Neil Orzech
    • 2
  • Rajesh Aggarwal
    • 3
  • Allan Okrainec
    • 4
  • Teodor P. Grantcharov
    • 5
  1. 1.Toronto General Hospital, The Wilson CentreTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Department of General SurgeryThe University of TorontoTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Department of Biosurgery and Surgical TechnologyImperial CollegeLondonUK
  4. 4.Department of General SurgeryThe Toronto Western HospitalTorontoCanada
  5. 5.Department of General SurgerySt. Michael’s HospitalTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations