Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 27, Issue 11, pp 4033–4037 | Cite as

Feasibility of remote administration of the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) skills test

  • Allan Okrainec
  • Melina Vassiliou
  • Andrew Kapoor
  • Kristen Pitzul
  • Oscar Henao
  • Pepa Kaneva
  • Timothy Jackson
  • E. Matt Ritter
Article

Abstract

Background

Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) certification testing currently is offered at accredited test centers or at select surgical conferences. Maintaining these test centers requires considerable investment in human and financial resources. Additionally, it can be challenging for individuals outside North America to become FLS certified. The objective of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility of remotely administering and scoring the FLS examination using live videoconferencing compared with standard onsite testing.

Methods

This parallel mixed-methods study used both FLS scoring data and participant feedback to determine the barriers to feasibility of remote proctoring for the FLS examination. Participants were tested at two accredited FLS testing centers. An official FLS proctor administered and scored the FLS exam remotely while another onsite proctor provided a live score of participants’ performance. Participant feedback was collected during testing. Interrater reliabilities of onsite and remote FLS scoring data were compared using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Participant feedback was analyzed using modified grounded theory to identify themes for barriers to feasibility.

Results

The scores of the remote and onsite proctors showed excellent interrater reliability in the total FLS (ICC 0.995, CI [0.985–0.998]). Several barriers led to critical errors in remote scoring, but most were accompanied by a solution incorporated into the study protocol. The most common barrier was the chain of custody for exam accessories.

Conclusion

The results of this pilot study suggest that remote administration of the FLS has the potential to decrease costs without altering test-taker scores or exam validity. Further research is required to validate protocols for remote and onsite proctors and to direct execution of these protocols in a controlled environment identical to current FLS test administration.

Keywords

Distance learning Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery Surgical education Telesimulation 

References

  1. 1.
    SAGES (2013) Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery. www.flsprogram.org. Accessed Feb 2013
  2. 2.
    Derossis AM, Fried GM, Abrahamowicz M, Sigman HH, Barkun JS, Meakins JL (1998) Development of a model for training and evaluation of laparoscopic skills. Am J Surg 175:482–487PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Peters JH, Fried GM, Swanstrom LL, Soper NJ, Sillin LF, Schirmer B, Hoffman K (2004) Development and validation of a comprehensive program of education and assessment of the basic fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery. Surgery 135:21–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Derossis AM, Bothwell J, Sigman HH, Fried GM (1998) The effect of practice on performance in a laparoscopic simulator. Surg Endosc 12:1117–1120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    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 240:518–525PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vassiliou MC, Ghitulescu GA, Feldman LS, Stanbridge D, Leffondré K, Sigman HH, Fried GM (2006) The MISTELS program for measure technical skill in laparoscopic surgery: evidence for reliability. Surg Endosc 20:744–747PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McCluney AL, Vassiliou MC, Kaneva PA, Cao J, Stanbridge DD, Feldman LS, Fried GM (2007) FLS simulator performance predicts intraoperative laparoscopic skill. Surg Endosc 21:1991–1995PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vassiliou MC, Ghitulescu GA, Feldman LS, Stanbridge D, Leffondré K, Sigman HH, Fried GM (2010) Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery simulator training to proficiency improves laparoscopic performance in the operating room: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Surg 199:115–120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Soper NJ, Fried GM (2008) The Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery: its time has come. Bull Am Coll Surg 93:30–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Okrainec A, Henao O, Azzie G (2009) Telesimulation: an effective method for teaching the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery in resource-restricted countries. Surg Endosc 24:417–422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eadie LH, Seifalian AM, Davidson BR (2003) Telemedicine in surgery. Br J Surg 90:647–658PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Anvari M (2007) Telesurgery: remote knowledge translation in clinical surgery. World J Surg 31:1545–1550PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hiatt JR, Shabot MM, Phillips EH, Haines RF, Grant TL (1996) Telesurgery: acceptability of compressed video for remote surgical proctoring. Arch Surg 131:396–401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Anvari M (2007) Remote telepresence surgery: the Canadian experience. Surg Endosc 21:537–541PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Anvari M (2007) Impact of information technology on human resources in healthcare. Healthc Q 10:84–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Latifi R, Peck K, Satava R, Anvari M (2004) Telepresence and telementoring in surgery. Stud Health Technol Inform 104:200–206PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schlachta CM, Lefebvre KL, Sorsdahl AK, Jayaraman S (2010) Mentoring and telementoring leads to effective incorporation of laparoscopic colon surgery. Surg Endosc 24:841–844PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Allan Okrainec
    • 1
    • 2
  • Melina Vassiliou
    • 3
  • Andrew Kapoor
    • 2
  • Kristen Pitzul
    • 1
  • Oscar Henao
    • 1
  • Pepa Kaneva
    • 3
  • Timothy Jackson
    • 1
    • 2
  • E. Matt Ritter
    • 4
  1. 1.Temerty/Chang Telesimulation Centre, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health NetworkTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Montreal General Hospital, McGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  4. 4.Uniformed Services UniversityBethesdaUSA

Personalised recommendations