You have accessJournal of UrologyTechnology & Instruments: Surgical Education & Skills Assessment/Ureteroscopy I1 Apr 2012861 EXTERNAL VALIDITY OF STANDARDIZED TASKS FOR EVALUATION AND TEACHING OF ROBOTIC TECHNICAL SKILLS Alvin Goh, Andrew Hung, Isuru Jayaratna, Kara Teruya, Mukul Patil, Matthew Dunn, and Inderbir Gill Alvin GohAlvin Goh Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author , Andrew HungAndrew Hung Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author , Isuru JayaratnaIsuru Jayaratna Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author , Kara TeruyaKara Teruya Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author , Mukul PatilMukul Patil Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author , Matthew DunnMatthew Dunn Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author , and Inderbir GillInderbir Gill Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.954AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES There is a growing need for primary acquisition of technical skills to occur outside the operating room. Building on initial validation, we demonstrate external face and construct validity of a standardized model of structured training tasks designed to measure robotic skills called the Fundamentals of Robotic Surgery (FRS). METHODS A broad sample of 49 subjects from various geographic regions, including 11 expert robotic surgeons (completed >30 robotic cases) and 38 urology trainees (ranging from post-graduate year 3 to 8) were evaluated. Standardized instructions and video demonstration were given to each subject. Participant performance of 4 structured robotic tasks (horizontal mattress suture, clover pattern resection, 3-dimensional peg placement, circular target needle placement) was measured using a scoring system based on efficiency and precision. To assess face and content validity, subjects were asked to rate the curriculum on a 5-point Likert scale according to 1) difficulty, 2) similarity to skills required for robotic surgery, 3) usefulness for skills evaluation, 4) usefulness in skills training, and 5) requirement for proficiency. RESULTS Experts consistently performed better than trainees in all 4 tasks of FRS (Table 1). Experts and novices agreed FRS was appropriately challenging and incorporated skills required for robotic surgery (p>0.05). Greater than 96% of respondents thought the structured tasks were useful for robotic skills assessment and training. Table 1. Mean task performance scores (lower is better) Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Experts (n=11) 153±38 147±34 87±22 167±53 Novices (n=38) 265±64 189±67 203±71 315±91 p-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 CONCLUSIONS We confirm external face, content, and construct validity of a structured inanimate robotic skills curriculum (FRS) in a diverse cohort. Performance on FRS appears to correlate with level of robotic technical ability. This model may be integrated in a comprehensive robotics training program. © 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 187Issue 4SApril 2012Page: e351 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Alvin Goh Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Andrew Hung Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Isuru Jayaratna Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Kara Teruya Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Mukul Patil Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Matthew Dunn Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Inderbir Gill Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Read full abstract