Educational implications for surgical telementoring: a current review with recommendations for future practice, policy, and research
- 479 Downloads
Surgical telementoring (ST) was introduced in the sixties, promoting videoconferencing to enhance surgical education across large distances. Widespread use of ST in the surgical community is lacking. Despite numerous surveys assessing ST, there remains a lack of high-level scientific evidence demonstrating its impact on mentorship and surgical education. Despite this, there is an ongoing paradigm shift involving remote presence technologies and their application to skill development and technique dissemination in the international surgical community. Factors facilitating this include improved access to ST technology, including ease of use and data transmission, and affordability. Several international research initiatives have commenced to strengthen the scientific foundation documenting the impact of ST in surgical education and performance.
International experts on ST were invited to the SAGES Project Six Summit in August 2015. Two experts in surgical education prepared relevant questions for discussion and organized the meeting (JP and HH). The questions were open-ended, and the discussion continued until no new item appeared. The transcripts of interviews were recorded by a secretary from SAGES.
In this paper, we present a summary of the work performed by the SAGES Project 6 Education Working Group. We summarize the existing evidence regarding education in ST, identify and detail conceptual educational frameworks that may be used during ST, and present a structured framework for an educational curriculum in ST.
The educational impact and optimal curricular organization of ST programs are largely unexplored. We outline the critical components of a structured ST curriculum, including prerequisites, teaching modalities, and key curricular components. We also detail research strategies critical to its continued evolution as an educational tool, including randomized controlled trials, establishment of a quality registry, qualitative research, learning analytics, and development of a standardized taxonomy.
KeywordsTelementoring Telemedicine Surgical education Surgical training Surgical technology Health policy
Rolv-Ole Lindsetmo, MD, PhD; Michael Kim, MD; Melina Vassilou, MD; Erik Dutson, MD; Maria Marcela Bailez, MD; Rifat Latifi, MD. Industry participants: Chuck Kennedy (Medtronic), Brian Witte (Ethicon), Kris Danforth (Stryker), Suzanne Jefferson (Karl Storz), Anthony Jarc (Intuitive).
Dr. Paige discloses other support from Oxford University Press, as well as grants from LSU Board of Supervisors, Acell, Inc., Intuitive Inc., HRSA, and SGEA, during the conduct of the study; he also discloses that he serves as Chair of the Continuing Education Committee for SAGES. Dr. Ponsky discloses personal fees from Conmed, during the conduct of the study. Drs. Augestad, Han, Schlachta, Dunkin, and Mellinger have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
- 10.Augestad KM, Bogen E, Patel H (2014) Telemedicine as a quality improvement facilitator in pelvic cancer surgery. In: Patel H, Delaney CP (eds) Pelvic cancer surgery. Springer, London, pp 29–37Google Scholar
- 17.Rothenberg S, Yoder S, Kay S, Ponsky T (2011) Initial experience with surgical telementoring in pediatric laparoscopic surgery using remote presence technology. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 5:1–4Google Scholar
- 19.Baram-Clothier E, Augestad KM (2014) Surgical telementoring news. The American Medical Foundation Newsletter [Internet]. 7(1):1–10. http://www.medicalfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Surgical-Telementoring-News-2014e.pdf
- 21.SAGES (2004) Guidelines for the surgical practice of telemedicine. 26:1–10. https://www.sages.org/publications/guidelines/guidelines-for-the-surgical-practice-of-telemedicine/
- 22.Schlachta CM, Nguyen NT, Ponsky T, Dunkin B (2016) Project 6 Summit: SAGES telementoring initiative. Surg Endosc 25:1–8Google Scholar
- 23.SAGES (2013) Framework for post-residency surgical education & training. 26:1–9. http://www.sages.org/publications/guidelines/framework-for-post-residency-surgical-education-training/
- 25.Budronius A, Belika JG, Augestad K (2012) Telestration in mobile telementoring. eTELEMED 2013: the fifth international conference on eHealth, telemedicine, and social medicine. ISBN: 978-1-61208-252-3:1–3Google Scholar
- 28.Ereso AQ, Garcia P, Tseng E, Gauger G, Kim H, Dua MM, et al (2010) Live transference of surgical subspecialty skills using telerobotic proctoring to remote general surgeons. ACS 211(3):400–411Google Scholar
- 30.Snyder CW, Vandromme MJ, Tyra SL, Hawn MT (2012) Proficiency-based laparoscopic and endoscopic training with virtual reality simulators: a comparison of proctored and independent approaches. JSURG 66(4):201–207Google Scholar
- 39.Vassiliou M, Feldman L, Andrew C, Bergman S, Leffondré K, Stanbridge D et al (2005) A global assessment tool for evaluation of intraoperative laparoscopic skills. AJS 190(1):7Google Scholar
- 43.Bandura A (1977) Social learning theory. Prentice Hall, TorontoGoogle Scholar
- 46.More MG (1997) In: Keegan D (ed) Theory of transactional distance. Routledge, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
- 48.Asad E, Hassan RB, Sherwani EF (2014) Instructional models for enhancing the performance of students and workforce during educational training. Academ Arena 6(3):27–31Google Scholar
- 52.Warth L, Bogen E, Lindsetmo RO, Patel H, Augestad KM (2015) Collaboration in surgical training. A qualitative study of mentoring laparoscopic surgeons by using videoconference in northern Norway. eTELEMED: the seventh international conference on eHealth, telemedicine, and social medicine. ISBN: 978-1-61208-384-1:6–9Google Scholar
- 53.Warth L, Patel H, Bogen E, Gjessing P, Augestad KM, Ponsky T, et al (2015) Video-recorded observations of surgical telementoring. Int J Adv Life Sci 7:1–8. http://www.thinkmind.org/index.php?view=article&articleid=lifsci_v7_n34_2015_3