Supporting the Development of Psychomotor Skills

  • Pamela Andreatta
  • Paul Dougherty
Part of the Innovation and Change in Professional Education book series (ICPE, volume 17)


Comprehensive acquisition and mastery of psychomotor skills for surgical procedures must eventually be facilitated in the context of applied surgery. Although simulation-supported instruction provides a benign environment for acquiring basic abilities such as suturing and knot tying, the application of those abilities within procedural contexts requires alignment of optimal techniques and integration of process sequences dictated by operative circumstances. Trainees acquire these abilities through direct guidance and supervision by operative faculty. The challenge for faculty and trainees is to align the abilities of trainees within a procedural context, so trainees are able to practice what they have learned, while safely acquiring new abilities. We introduce a framework based on the Dave taxonomy of the psychomotor domain and implemented through the briefing-intraoperative-debriefing (BID) model that allows faculty and trainees to deliberately and collaboratively plan and monitor the cycle of psychomotor acquisition and development of mastery in any surgical context.


BID Psychomotor skills Dave taxonomy Briefing Debriefing 


  1. 1.
    Simpson, E. J. (1972). The classification of educational objectives in the psychomotor domain. Washington, DC: Gryphon House.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Harrow, A. (1972). A taxonomy of the psychomotor domain: A guide for developing behavioral objectives. New York: David McKay.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dave, R. H. (1970). Psychomotor levels. In R. J. Armstrong (Ed.), Developing and writing behavioral objectives (pp. 20–21). Tucson: Educational Innovators Press.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Roemer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roberts, N. K., Williams, R. G., Kim, M. J., & Dunnington, G. L. (2009). The briefing, intraoperative teaching, debriefing model for teaching in the operating room. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 208(2), 299–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Moulton, C. A., Regehr, G., Lingard, L., Merritt, C., & Macrae, H. (2010). Operating from the other side of the table: Control dynamics and the surgeon educator. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 210(1), 79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moulton, C. A., Regehr, G., Lingard, L., Merritt, C., & Macrae, H. (2010). ‘Slowing down when you should’: Initiators and influences of the transition from the routine to the effortful. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 14(6), 1019–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hodges, B. D., & Kuper, A. (2012). Theory and practice in the design and conduct of graduate medical education. Academic Medicine, 87(1), 25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rieselbach, R., Sundwall, D., Shine, K. (2015). Graduate medical education: The need for new leadership in governance and financing. Health Affairs Blog.
  10. 10.
    Anderson, O. R. (1997). A neurocognitive perspective on current learning theory and science instructional strategies. Science Education, 81, 67–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), 149–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. (2007). Interactive multimodal learning environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 309–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pollock, E., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 61–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Mind and society (pp. 79–91). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pamela Andreatta
    • 1
  • Paul Dougherty
    • 2
  1. 1.Metrics-Healthcare, LLCFLUSA
  2. 2.University of FloridaJacksonvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations