MP11-05 IS SEEING BELIEVING? TECHNICAL MENTORSHIP DURING ROBOT-ASSISTED SURGERY

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologySurgical Technology & Simulation: Training & Skills Assessment I1 Apr 2016MP11-05 IS SEEING BELIEVING? TECHNICAL MENTORSHIP DURING ROBOT-ASSISTED SURGERY Ahmed Hussein, Somayeh Shafiei, Mohamed Sharif, Basel Ahmad, Ehsan Esfahani, and Khurshid Guru Ahmed HusseinAhmed Hussein More articles by this author , Somayeh ShafieiSomayeh Shafiei More articles by this author , Mohamed SharifMohamed Sharif More articles by this author , Basel AhmadBasel Ahmad More articles by this author , Ehsan EsfahaniEhsan Esfahani More articles by this author , and Khurshid GuruKhurshid Guru More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.2376AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Cognitive and mental workload assessment may play a critical role in defining successful mentorship. We sought to elucidate the cognitive performance metrics of surgical mentor during robot-assisted surgery, and to identify if viewing operative performance of surgical trainees is similar to performing robot-assisted surgery for a surgical mentor METHODS An IRB approved study enrolled 51 robot-assisted surgical procedures performed by single surgeon between 2013 and 2014. A 20-channel wireless electroencephalography (EEG) recording device was used to monitor brain activity using neuro-headset during all surgical procedures. During each task, participant’s cognitive engagement, mental workload and mental state were evaluated via wireless EEG recordings. Two key portions of interaction between trainee and robotic surgeon mentor while performing prostatectomy & cystectomy were included in the analysis: extended lymph node dissection (eLND) (n=21) and urethro-vesical anastomosis (UVA) (n=19). Live, intraoperative exchange between robotic surgeon mentor and trainee in field notes, NASA -TLX based subjective evaluations were also assessed. RESULTS Lymph Node Dissection: As the trainee surgeon felt that the procedure was more challenging (high mental and/or physical demands), he was more frustrated and had to put more effort and his perception of his performance was worse. Meanwhile the mentor surgeon’s workload was increased (continuous concern and more attention) towards the trainee’s performance. Urethro-vesical Anastomosis: Whenever the trainee felt the procedure was challenging (high mental, physical or temporal demands), the expert was paying more attention (higher mental state and lower distraction). As the trainee felt more operative challenges, the expert also felt it was both mentally and physically demanding. However, it did not affect the perception of expert on trainee frustration, effort and performance level. There was no significant difference between cognitive metrics of the surgeon while watching the trainee and while actually performing the same surgical steps. CONCLUSIONS Utilization of cognitive performance metrics during live intra-operative mentorship can provide insight into studying team behavior and interaction during complex demanding surgical performance. Further research is required into use of cognitive performance metrics to assess the relationship between performance, mentorship, and its educational impact. © 2016FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 195Issue 4SApril 2016Page: e112-e113 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2016MetricsAuthor Information Ahmed Hussein More articles by this author Somayeh Shafiei More articles by this author Mohamed Sharif More articles by this author Basel Ahmad More articles by this author Ehsan Esfahani More articles by this author Khurshid Guru More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...