Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bimodal assessment of laparoscopic suturing skills

Construct and concurrent validity

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The assessment of technical skills should provide objective feedback and judge suitability of progress during training. The aim of this study was to validate two objective assessment techniques for laparoscopic suturing and demonstrate a correlation between them.

Methods

Six experts, seven surgeons skilled in laparoscopic suturing, and 13 with no laparoscopic suturing skills were asked to place two or three intracorporeal sutures on a synthetic suture pad. The latter group was given video-based instructions prior to the execution of the sutures. Ergonomic conditions were standardized for all subjects. The procedures were recorded on videotape and two blinded observers rated the first suture of each subject on a 29-point checklist. A motion analysis system, Imperial College Surgical Assessment Device, was used to assess psychomotor skills.

Results

There was a significant difference in the time taken (p=0.000) and total path length (p=0.000) per suture across the groups. There were also a significant difference in the total checklist score (p=0.000) and its individual categories. The was a strong correlation between the total path length and the total checklist score (coefficient, 0.78;p<0.001).

Conclusions

A combination of the motion analysis system and the checklist would make the process of formative feedback during the learning of intracorporeal suturing objective and comprehensive.

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. Cagir B, Rangraj M, Maffuci L, Herz BL (1994) The learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Laparoendose Surg 4: 419–427

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Chung JY, Sackier JM (1998) A method of objectively evaluating improvements in laparoscopic skills. Surg Endosc 12: 1111–1116

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Cuschieri A, Francis N, Crosby J, Hanna GB (2001) What do master surgeons think of surgical competence and revalidation? Am J Surg 182:110–116

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Deziel DJ, Millikan KW, Economou SG, Doolas A, Ko ST, Airan MC (1993) Complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a national survey of 4,292 hospitals and an analysis of 77,604 cases. Am J Surg 165: 9–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Eubanks TR, Clements RH, Pohl D, Williams N, Schaad DC, Horgan S, et al. (1999) An objective scoring system for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 189: 566–574

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Fleshman JW, Fry RD, Birnbaum EH, Kodner IJ (1996) Laparoscopic-assisted and minilaparotomy approaches to colorectal diseases are similar in early outcome. Dis Colon Rectum 39: 15–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Gallagher AG, Satava RM (2002) Virtual reality as a metric for the assessment of laparoscopic psychomotor skills. Learning curves and reliability measures. Surg Endosc 16: 1746–1752

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kopta JA (1971) An approach to the evaluation of operative skills. Surgery 70: 297–303

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lekawa M, Shapiro SJ, Gordon LA, Rothbart J, Hiatt JR (1995) The laparoscopic learning curve. Surg Laparosc Endosc 5: 455–458

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mori T, Hatano N, Maruyama S, Atomi Y (1998) Significance of “hands-on training” in laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 12: 256–260

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Peters JH, Ellison EC, Innes JT, Liss JL, Nichols KE, Lomano JM, et al. (1991) Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A prospective analysis of 100 initial patients. Ann Surg 213: 3–12

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Regehr G, MacRae H, Reznick RK, Szalay D (1998) Comparing the psychometric properties of checklists and global rating scales for assessing performance on an OSCE-format examination. Acad Med 73: 993–997

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Reznick RK (1993) Teaching and testing technical skills. Am J Surg 165: 358–361

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rosser JC Jr, Rosser LE, Savalgi RS (1998) Objective evaluation of a laparoscopic surgical skill program for residents and senior surgeons. Arch Surg 133: 657–661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Royston CM, Lansdown MR, Brough WA (1994) Teaching laparoscopic surgery: the need for guidelines. Br Med J 308: 1023–1025

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Simons AJ, Anthone GJ, Ortega AE, Franklin M, Fleshman J, Geis WP, et al. (1995) Laparoscopic-assisted colectomy learning curve. Dis Colon Rectum 38: 600–603

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Spencer FC, Spencer FC (1978) Teaching and measuring surgical techniques the technical evaluation of competence. Bull Am Coll Surgeons 63: 9–12

    Google Scholar 

  21. Taffinder N, Smith S, Mair J, Russell R, Darzi A (1999) Can a computer measure surgical precision? Reliability, validity and feasibility of the ICSAD. Surg Endose 13(suppl 1): 81

    Google Scholar 

  22. Watts J, Feldman WB (1985) Assessment of technical skills. In: Neufeld VR, Norman GR (eds). Assessing clinical competence. Springer: New York, pp 259–274

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgical Oncology and Technology, Imperial College, St. Mary’s Hospital, 10th Floor, QEQM Building, Praed Street, W2 1NY, London

    K. Moorthy, Y. Munz, A. Dosis, F. Bello, A. Chang & A. Darzi

Authors
  1. K. Moorthy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Y. Munz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Dosis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. F. Bello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. A. Darzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Online publication: 13 October 2004

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moorthy, K., Munz, Y., Dosis, A. et al. Bimodal assessment of laparoscopic suturing skills. Surg Endosc 18, 1608–1612 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02637130

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02637130

Key words

Search

Navigation