Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Construct validity and educational role for motion analysis in a laparoscopic trainer

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic models for ex vivo up-skilling are becoming increasingly important components of surgical education. This study aims to establish the construct validity and possible educational role of a new laparoscopic box trainer equipped with a motion-tracking device.

Methods

A structured questionnaire was used to assign participants into novice, intermediate, or expert categories according to level of experience in minimal access surgery (MAS). Participants carried out a well-defined intracorporeal suturing task. Three specific motion analysis parameters (MAPs)—velocity, acceleration, and range—were measured and analyzed as movements in the four degrees of freedom available in traditional MAS using tracking sensors at the trocar insertion sites.

Results

The number of extreme velocity and acceleration events in all four degrees of freedom proved capable of differentiating between participants in the three categories of surgical experience using an ANOVA test (p < 0.001). Post hoc analysis confirmed these differences in the number of extreme velocity and acceleration events between all groups tested except for the velocity of the roll between the intermediates and experts.

Conclusion

These findings confirm construct validity for this new laparoscopic box trainer system, which employs a novel analysis based on motion parameters. Motion parameters provide information regarding the overall smoothness of the operator’s instrument handling, an important aspect of a surgeon’s technique. This preliminary data will be used to design a simulator with real-time motion feedback to enhance its educational value.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ferreres AR, Asbun HJ (2014) Technical aspects of cholecystectomy. Surg Clin North Am 94(2):427–454

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Staudacher C, Vignali A (2010) Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: the state of the art. World J Gastrointest Surg 2:275–282

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Klarenbeek BR, Bergamaschi R, Veenhof AAFA, van der Peet DL, van den Broek WT, de Lange ESM, Bemelman WA, Heres P, Lacy AM, Cuesta MA (2011) Laparoscopic versus open sigmoid resection for diverticular disease: follow-up assessment of the randomized control Sigma trial. Surg Endosc 25:1121–1126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Tholey G, Desai JP, Castellanos AE (2005) Force feedback plays a significant role in minimally invasive surgery: results and analysis. Ann Surg 241:102–109

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Westebring-van der Putten EP, Goossens RHM, Jakimowicz JJ, Dankelman J (2008) Haptics in minimally invasive surgery—a review. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 17:3–16

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hunter JG (1997) Advanced laparoscopic surgery. Am J Surg 173:14–18

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Crothers IR, Gallagher AG, McClure N, James DT, McGuigan J (1999) Experienced laparoscopic surgeons are automated to the ‘‘fulcrum effect’’: an ergonomic demonstration. Endoscopy 31:365–369

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gallagher AG, McClure N, McGuigan J, Ritchie K, Sheehy NP (1998) An ergonomic analysis of the fulcrum effect in the acquisition of endoscopic skills. Endoscopy 30:617–620

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hanna GB, Cuschieri A (1999) Influence of the optical axis-to target view angle on endoscopic task performance. Surg Endosc 13:371–375

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Grantcharov TP, Kristiansen VB, Bendix J, Bardram L, Rosenberg J, Funch-Jensen P (2004) Randomized clinical trial of virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic skills training. Br J Surg 91:146–150

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Scott DJ, Bergen PC, Rege RV, Laycock R, Tesfay ST, Valentine RJ, Euhus DM, Jeyarajah DR, Thompson WM, Jones DB (2000) Laparoscopic training on bench models: better and more cost effective than operating room experience? J Am Coll Surg 191:272–283

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, O’Brien MK, Bansal VK, Andersen DK, Satava RM (2002) Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg 236:458–463

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rosser JC, Rosser LE, Savalgi RS (1997) Skill acquisition and assessment for laparoscopic surgery. Arch Surg 132:200–204

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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 139:729–734

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fried GM, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC, Fraser SA, Stanbridge D, Ghitulescu G, Andrew CG, Schirmer BD, Gadacz TR, Moody FG, Soper NJ, Gold JP, Way LW (2004) Proving the value of simulation in laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 240(3):518–528

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Anastakis DJ, Regehr G, Reznick RK, Cusimano M, Murnaghan J, Brown M, Hutchison C (1999) Assessment of technical skills transfer from the bench training model to the human model. Am J Surg 177:167–170

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Dhariwal AK, Prabhu RY, Dalvi AN, Supe AN (2007) Effectiveness of box trainers in laparoscopic training. J Minim Access Surg 3:57–63

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hiemstra E, Chmarra MK, Dankelman J, Jansen FW (2011) Intracorporeal suturing: economy of instrument movements using a box trainer model. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 18:494–499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. van Empel PJ, van Rijssen LB, Commandeur JP, Verdam MG, Huirne JA, Scheele F, Jaap Bonjer H, Jeroen Meijerink W (2012) Validation of a new box trainer-related tracking device: the TrEndo. Surg Endosc 26:2346–2352

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Smith SG, Torkington J, Brown TJ, Taffinder NJ, Darzi A (2002) Motion analysis. Surg Endosc 16:640–645

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Uemura M, Tomikawa M, Kumashiro R, Miao T, Souzaki R, Ieiri S, Ohuchida K, Lefor AT, Hashizume M (2014) Analysis of hand motion differentiates expert and novice surgeons. J Surg Res 188(1):8–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Smith CD, Farrell TM, McNatt SS, Metreveli RE (2001) Assessing laparoscopic manipulative skills. Am J Surg 181:547–550

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mason JD, Ansell J, Warren N, Torkington J (2013) Is motion analysis a valid tool for assessing laparoscopic skill? Surg Endosc 27(5):1468–1477

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank all surgeons, residents, and students who contributed their time to this study, for their valuable input and expertise.

Disclosures

Authors Maeve O’Neill Trudeau, Ahmed Nasr, Brian Carrillo, J. Ted Gerstle, and Georges Azzie have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    Maeve O’Neill Trudeau

  2. Department of Surgery, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

    Ahmed Nasr

  3. Centre for Image Guided Innovation & Therapeutic Intervention, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada

    Brian Carrillo

  4. Division of General and Thoracic Surgery, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada

    J. Ted Gerstle & Georges Azzie

Authors
  1. Maeve O’Neill Trudeau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ahmed Nasr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brian Carrillo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. Ted Gerstle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Georges Azzie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maeve O’Neill Trudeau.

Additional information

Presented at the SAGES 2014 Annual Meeting, April 2–5, 2014, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Trudeau, M.O., Nasr, A., Carrillo, B. et al. Construct validity and educational role for motion analysis in a laparoscopic trainer. Surg Endosc 29, 2491–2495 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3988-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3988-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation