Tailored Process Feedback Through Process Mining for Surgical Procedures in Medical Training: The Central Venous Catheter Case

  • Ricardo Lira
  • Juan Salas-Morales
  • Rene de la Fuente
  • Ricardo Fuentes
  • Marcos Sepúlveda
  • Michael Arias
  • Valeria Herskovic
  • Jorge Munoz-GamaEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 342)


In healthcare, developing high procedural skill levels through training is a key factor for obtaining good clinical results on surgical procedures. Providing feedback to each student tailored to how the student has performed the procedure each time, improves the effectiveness of the training. Current state-of-the-art feedback relies on Checklists and Global Rating Scales to indicate whether all process steps have been performed and the quality of each execution step. However, there is a process perspective not successfully captured by those instruments, e.g., steps performed but in an undesired order, part of the process repeated an unnecessary number of times, or excessive transition time between steps. In this work, we propose a novel use of process mining techniques to effectively identify desired and undesired process patterns regarding rework, order, and performance, in order to complement the tailored feedback of surgical procedures using a process perspective. The approach has been effectively applied to analyze a real Central Venous Catheter installation training case. In the future, it is necessary to measure the actual impact of feedback on learning.


Process mining Healthcare Feedback Medical training Surgical procedures 



This work is partially supported by CONICYT FONDECYT 181162, CONICYT FONDECYT 11170092, CONICYT REDI 170136, VRI-UC Interdisciplinary 2017, and FOND-DCC 2017-0001. We thank Jerome Geyer-Klingeberg and Celonis Academic Alliance for their support and material.


  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process Mining - Data Science in Action. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). Scholar
  2. 2.
    Archer, J.C.: State of the science in health professional education: effective feedback. Med. Educ. 44(1), 101–108 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bould, M., Crabtree, N., Naik, V.: Assessment of procedural skills in anaesthesia. Br. J. Anaesth. 103(4), 472–483 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chowdhury, R.R., Kalu, G.: Learning to give feedback in medical education. Obstet. Gynaecol. 6(4), 243–247 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cook, D.A., et al.: Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Jama 306(9), 978–988 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Corvetto, M., Pedemonte, J., Varas, D., Fuentes, C., Altermatt, F.: Simulation-based training program with deliberate practice for ultrasound-guided jugular central venous catheter placement. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 61(9), 1184–1191 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    van Eck, M.L., Lu, X., Leemans, S.J.J., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: PM\(^2\): a process mining project methodology. In: Zdravkovic, J., Kirikova, M., Johannesson, P. (eds.) CAiSE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9097, pp. 297–313. Springer, Cham (2015). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fecso, A.B., Szasz, P., Kerezov, G., Grantcharov, T.P.: The effect of technical performance on patient outcomes in surgery: a systematic review. Ann. Surg. 265(3), 492–501 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Günther, C.W., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Fuzzy mining – adaptive process simplification based on multi-perspective metrics. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 328–343. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hagedorn, J., Hailpern, J., Karahalios, K.G.: Vcode and vdata: illustrating a new framework for supporting the video annotation workflow. In: Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, pp. 317–321. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ilgen, J.S., Ma, I.W., Hatala, R., Cook, D.A.: A systematic review of validity evidence for checklists versus global rating scales in simulation-based assessment. Med. Educ. 49(2), 161–173 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lalys, F., Jannin, P.: Surgical process modelling: a review. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg. 9(3), 495–511 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leape, L.L., et al.: The nature of adverse events in hospitalized patients: results of the harvard medical practice study ii. N. Engl. J. Med. 324(6), 377–384 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ma, I.W., et al.: Comparing the use of global rating scale with checklists for the assessment of central venous catheterization skills using simulation. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. 17(4), 457–470 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nesbitt, C.I., Phillips, A.W., Searle, R.F., Stansby, G.: Randomized trial to assess the effect of supervised and unsupervised video feedback on teaching practical skills. J. Surg. Educ. 72(4), 697–703 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Neumuth, D., Loebe, F., Herre, H., Neumuth, T.: Modeling surgical processes: a four-level translational approach. AI Med. 51(3), 147–161 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rojas, E., Munoz-Gama, J., Sepúlveda, M., Capurro, D.: Process mining in healthcare: a literature review. J. Biomed. Inform. 61, 224–236 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rojas, E., Sepúlveda, M., Munoz-Gama, J., Capurro, D., Traver, V., Fernandez-Llatas, C.: Question-driven methodology for analyzing emergency room processes using process mining. Appl. Sci. 7(3), 302 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Walter, A.J.: Surgical education for the twenty-first century: beyond the apprentice model. Obstet. Gynecol. Clin. 33(2), 233–236 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zendejas, B., Wang, A.T., Brydges, R., Hamstra, S.J., Cook, D.A.: Cost: the missing outcome in simulation-based medical education research: a systematic review. Surgery 153(2), 160–176 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ricardo Lira
    • 1
  • Juan Salas-Morales
    • 1
  • Rene de la Fuente
    • 2
  • Ricardo Fuentes
    • 2
  • Marcos Sepúlveda
    • 1
  • Michael Arias
    • 3
  • Valeria Herskovic
    • 1
  • Jorge Munoz-Gama
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Computer Science Department, School of EngineeringSantiagoChile
  2. 2.Department of Anesthesiology, School of MedicinePontificia Universidad Católica de ChileSantiagoChile
  3. 3.Department of Business Computer ScienceUniversidad de Costa RicaSan JoseCosta Rica

Personalised recommendations