Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The purpose of this study was to validate the eoSim, an affordable and mobile inanimate laparoscopic simulator with instrument tracking capabilities, regarding face, content and construct validity on complex suturing tasks.
Participants recruited for this study were novices (no laparoscopic experience), target group for this training (surgical/gynaecologic/urologic residents, > 10 basic and < 20 advanced laparoscopic procedures) and experts (> 20 advanced laparoscopic procedures). Each participant performed the intracorporeal suturing exercise (Task 1), an upside down needle transfer (Task 2, developed for this study) and an anastomosis needle transfer (Task 3). Following, the participants completed a questionnaire regarding their demographics and opinion on the eoSim in terms of realism, didactic value and usability. Measured outcome parameters were time, distance, percentage of instrument tip off-screen, working area, speed, acceleration and smoothness.
In total, 104 participants completed the study, of which 60 novices, 31 residents and 13 experts. Face and content validity results showed a mean positive opinion on realism (3.9 Task 1, 3.6 Task 2 and 3.7 Task 3), didactic value (4.0, 3.4 and 3.7, respectively) and usability (4.2. 3.7 and 4.0, respectively). There were no significant differences in these outcomes between the specified expertise groups. Construct validity results showed significant differences between experts, target group or novices for Task 1 in terms of time (means 339, 607 and 1224 s, respectively, p < 0.001) and distance (means 8.1, 15.6 and 21.7 m, respectively, p < 0.001). Task 2 showed significant differences between groups regarding time (p < 0.001), distance (p 0.003), off-screen (p < 0.001) and working area (p < 0.001). Task 3 showed significant differences between groups, after subanalyses, on total number of stitches (p < 0.001), time per stitch (p < 0.001) and distance per stitch (p < 0.001).
The results of this study indicate that the eoSim is a potential meaningful and valuable simulator in the training of suturing tasks.
Harrington DT, Roye GD, Ryder BA, Miner TJ, Richardson P, Cioffi WG (2007) A time-cost analysis of teaching a laparoscopic entero-enterostomy. J Surg Educ 64:342–345 CrossRef
Bridges M, Diamond DL (1999) The financial impact of teaching surgical residents in the operating room. Am J Surg 177:28–32 CrossRef
Institute of Medicine Committee on Quality of Health Care in A (2000) In: Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS (eds) To Err is Human: building a safer health system, National Academies Press (US) Copyright 2000 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved., Washington (DC)
Zendejas B, Brydges R, Hamstra SJ, Cook DA (2013) State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surgery 257:586–593 CrossRef
Ballantyne GH (2002) The pitfalls of laparoscopic surgery: challenges for robotics and telerobotic surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 12:1–5 CrossRef
Nguyen T, Braga LH, Hoogenes J, Matsumoto ED (2013) Commercial video laparoscopic trainers versus less expensive, simple laparoscopic trainers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol 190:894–899 CrossRef
Badash I, Burtt K, Solorzano CA, Carey JN (2016) Innovations in surgery simulation: a review of past, current and future techniques. Ann Transl Med 4:453 CrossRef
Retrosi G, Cundy T, Haddad M, Clarke S (2015) Motion analysis-based skills training and assessment in pediatric laparoscopy: construct, concurrent, and content validity for the eoSim simulator. J laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 25:944–950 CrossRef
Hennessey IA, Hewett P (2013) Construct, concurrent, and content validity of the eoSim laparoscopic simulator. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:855–860 CrossRef
Partridge RW, Hughes MA, Brennan PM, Hennessey IA (2014) Accessible laparoscopic instrument tracking (“InsTrac”): construct validity in a take-home box simulator. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 24:578–583 CrossRef
eoSurgical (2018) eoSim simulators. Available at: https://www.eosurgical.com/. Accessed 5 Oct 2018
Calatayud D, Arora S, Aggarwal R, Kruglikova I, Schulze S, Funch-Jensen P, Grantcharov T (2010) Warm-up in a virtual reality environment improves performance in the operating room. Ann Surg 251:1181–1185 CrossRef
da Cruz JA, Dos Reis ST, Cunha Frati RM, Duarte RJ, Nguyen H, Srougi M, Passerotti CC (2016) Does warm-up training in a virtual reality simulator improve surgical performance? A prospective randomized analysis. J Surg Educ 73:974–978 CrossRef
Moldovanu R, Tarcoveanu E, Dimofte G, Lupascu C, Bradea C (2011) Preoperative warm-up using a virtual reality simulator. J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 15:533–538 CrossRef
Pike TW, Pathak S, Mushtaq F, Wilkie RM, Mon-Williams M, Lodge JPA (2017) A systematic examination of preoperative surgery warm-up routines. Surg Endosc 31:2202–2214 CrossRef
Abdalla G, Moran-Atkin E, Chen G, Schweitzer MA, Magnuson TH, Steele KE (2015) The effect of warm-up on surgical performance: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 29:1259–1269 CrossRef
Schout BM, Hendrikx AJ, Scheele F, Bemelmans BL, Scherpbier AJ (2010) Validation and implementation of surgical simulators: a critical review of present, past, and future. Surg Endosc 24:536–546 CrossRef
Carter FJ, Schijven MP, Aggarwal R, Grantcharov T, Francis NK, Hanna GB, Jakimowicz JJ (2005) Consensus guidelines for validation of virtual reality surgical simulators. Surg Endosc 19:1523–1532 CrossRef
Bradley P (2006) The history of simulation in medical education and possible future directions. Med Educ 40:254–262 CrossRef
Botden SM, de Hingh IH, Jakimowicz JJ (2009) Suturing training in augmented reality: gaining proficiency in suturing skills faster. Surg Endosc 23:2131–2137 CrossRef
Botden SM, Berlage JT, Schijven MP, Jakimowicz JJ (2008) Face validity study of the ProMIS augmented reality laparoscopic suturing simulator. Surg Technol Int 17:26–32 PubMed
Botden SM, Buzink SN, Schijven MP, Jakimowicz JJ (2008) ProMIS augmented reality training of laparoscopic procedures face validity. Simul Healthc J Soc Simul Healthc 3:97–102 CrossRef
Likert R (1932) A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archiv Psychol 140:5
Song T, Lee SH (2014) Barbed suture vs traditional suture in single-port total laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 21:825–829 CrossRef
- Construct, content and face validity of the eoSim laparoscopic simulator on advanced suturing tasks
Ivo De Blaauw
- Springer US
Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie
Mail Icon II