Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Face and content validity of Xperience™ Team Trainer: bed-side assistant training simulator for robotic surgery

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Updates in Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In robotic surgery, the coordination between the console-side surgeon and bed-side assistant is crucial, more than in standard surgery or laparoscopy where the surgical team works in close contact. Xperience™ Team Trainer (XTT) is a new optional component for the dv-Trainer® platform and simulates the patient-side working environment. We present preliminary results for face, content, and the workload imposed regarding the use of the XTT virtual reality platform for the psychomotor and communication skills training of the bed-side assistant in robot-assisted surgery. Participants were categorized into “Beginners” and “Experts”. They tested a series of exercises (Pick & Place Laparoscopic Demo, Pick & Place 2 and Team Match Board 1) and completed face validity questionnaires. “Experts” assessed content validity on another questionnaire. All the participants completed a NASA Task Load Index questionnaire to assess the workload imposed by XTT. Twenty-one consenting participants were included (12 “Beginners” and 9 “Experts”). XTT was shown to possess face and content validity, as evidenced by the rankings given on the simulator’s ease of use and realism parameters and on the simulator’s usefulness for training. Eight out of nine “Experts” judged the visualization of metrics after the exercises useful. However, face validity has shown some weaknesses regarding interactions and instruments. Reasonable workload parameters were registered. XTT demonstrated excellent face and content validity with acceptable workload parameters. XTT could become a useful tool for robotic surgery team training.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Liu M, Curet M (2015) A review of training research and virtual reality simulators for the da Vinci surgical system. Teach Learn Med 27:12–26

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Abboudi H, Khan MS, Aboumarzouk O, Guru KA, Challacombe B, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K (2013) Current status of validation for robotic surgery simulators—a systematic review. BJU Int 111:194–205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Torkington J, Smith SG, Rees BI, Darzi A (2001) Skill transfer from virtual reality to a real laparoscopic task. Surg Endosc 15:1076–1079

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sethi AS, Peine WJ, Mohammadi Y, Sundaram CP (2009) Validation of a novel virtual reality robotic simulator. J Endourol 23:503–508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Perrenot C, Perez M, Tran N, Jehl JP, Felblinger J, Bresler L, Hubert J (2012) The virtual reality simulator dV-Trainer® is a valid assessment tool for robotic surgical skills. Surg Endosc 26:2587–2593

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lendvay TS, Casale P, Sweet R, Peters C (2008) VR robotic surgery: randomized blinded study of the dV-Trainer robotic simulator. Stud Health Technol Inform 132:242–244

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kenney PA, Wszolek MF, Gould JJ, Libertino JA, Moinzadeh A (2009) Face, content, and construct validity of dV-trainer, a novel virtual reality simulator for robotic surgery. Urology 73:1288–1292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Korets R, Graversen JA, Mues A, Gupta M, Landman J, Badani KK (2011) Face and construct validity assessment of 2nd generation robotic surgery simulator. J Urol 185 (Suppl.):e488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Korets R, Mues AC, Graversen J, Gupta M, Landman J, Badani KK (2011) Comparison of robotic surgery skill acquisition between DV-Trainer and da Vinci surgical system: a randomized controlled study. J Urol 185 (Suppl.):e593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fantola G, Nguyen-Thi PL, Reibel N, Sirveaux MA, Germain A, Ayav A, Bresler L, Zarnegar R, Brunaud L (2014) Risk factors for postoperative morbidity after totally robotic gastric bypass in 302 consecutive patients. Obes Surg 25:1229–1238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Thiel DD, Lannen A, Richie E, Dove J, Gajarawala NM, Igel TC (2013) Simulation-based training for bedside assistants can benefit experienced robotic prostatectomy teams. J Endourol 27:230–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Renaud M, Reibel N, Zarnegar R, Germain A, Quilliot D, Ayav A, Bresler L, Brunaud L (2013) Multifactorial analysis of the learning curve for totally robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity. Obes Surg 23:1753–1760

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Brunaud L, Ayav A, Zarnegar R, Rouers A, Klein M, Boissel P, Bresler L (2008) Prospective evaluation of 100 robotic-assisted unilateral adrenalectomies. Surgery 144:995–1001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mimic® website. http://www.mimicsimulation.com/products/xperience/. Accessed June 1, 2015

  15. Tsuda S, Scott D, Doyle J, Jones DB (2009) Surgical skills training and simulation. Curr Probl Surg 46:271–370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. McDougall EM (2007) Validation of surgical simulators. J Endourol 21:244–247

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gallagher AG, Ritter EM, Satava RM (2003) Fundamental principles of validation, and reliability: rigorous science for the assessment of surgical education and training. Surg Endosc 17:1525–1529

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hubert N, Gilles M, Desbrosses K, Meyer JP, Felblinger J, Hubert J (2013) Ergonomic assessment of surgeon’s physical workloads during standard and robotic assisted laparoscopic procedures. Int J Med Robot 9:142–147

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hart SG, Staveland LE (1988) Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock PA, Meshkati N (eds) Human mental workload. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 139–183

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Sood A, Jeong W, Ahlawat R, Campbell L, Aggarwal S, Menon M, Bhandari M (2015) Robotic surgical skill acquisition: what one needs to know? J Minim Access Surg 11:10–15

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all the participants in the study, Ecole de Chirurgie de Nancy-Lorraine and its staff.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Digestive Hepatobiliary, Endocrine, and Oncologic Surgery, INSERM U954, CHU Nancy Brabois, University of Lorraine, 11 Allée du Morvan, 54511, Vandoeuvre Les Nancy, France

    Luca Sessa, Laurent Bresler & Laurent Brunaud

  2. School of Surgery of Nancy, IADI, INSERM, U947, CHU Nancy Brabois, Lorraine University, Nancy, France

    Cyril Perrenot, Song Xu, Jacques Hubert & Manuela Perez

Authors
  1. Luca Sessa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cyril Perrenot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Song Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jacques Hubert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Laurent Bresler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Laurent Brunaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Manuela Perez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Study conception and design: LS, CP, MP. Acquisition of the data: LS, CP, SX. Analysis and interpretation of data: LS, SX, CP, LB, LB. Drafting of manuscript: LS, CP, MP, JH. Critical revision of manuscript: JH, LB, LB.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luca Sessa.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sessa, L., Perrenot, C., Xu, S. et al. Face and content validity of Xperience™ Team Trainer: bed-side assistant training simulator for robotic surgery. Updates Surg 70, 113–119 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-017-0509-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-017-0509-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation