SIMULATION TRAINING
Design and validation of a model for robotic pyeloplasty simulation training
Published on
February 12, 2020
Journal of Pediatric Urology
Overview
Researchers developed and validated an inexpensive, high-fidelity training model for robotic pyeloplasty to address the limitations in operative experiences for urology residents. The model, created using tissue-mimicking silicone cast over 3D molds, was tested by urology faculty, fellows, and residents who performed robotic dismembered pyeloplasty after watching an instructional video. The study evaluated the model's acceptability, content validity, and construct validity through various measures, including procedure completion time, Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) score, repair quality, and flow rate.
The results demonstrated significant differences in performance between experts and novices across multiple assessment domains, supporting the model's construct validity. Faculty consistently outperformed fellows and residents in all measured aspects, including procedure time, flow rate, GEARS score, and repair quality. The model's low cost and quick production time make it an accessible and practical tool for repetitive practice of pyeloplasty skills before live cases. The study concludes that this pyeloplasty model exhibits acceptability, content validity, and construct validity, positioning it as a valuable training resource in urology education.
Results
In total, 5 urology faculty, 6 fellows, and 14 residents participated. The median robotic console experience among faculty, fellows, and residents was 8 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 6-11), 3.5 years (IQR = 2-4 years), and 0 years (IQR = 0-0.5 years), respectively. The median procedure completion time was 29 min (IQR = 26-40 min), and the median flow rate was 1.11 mL/s (IQR = 0-1.34 mL/s). All faculty had flow rates >1.25 mL/s and procedure times <30 min compared with 2 of 6 fellows and none of the residents (P < 0.001). All faculty, half of the fellows, and none of the residents achieved a GEARS score ≥20, with a median resident score of 12.5 (IQR = 8-13) (P < 0.001). For repair quality, all faculty scored ≥9 (out of 10), all fellows scored ≥8, and the median score among residents was 6 (IQR = 2-6) (P < 0.001). The material cost was $1.32/model, and the average production time was 0.12 person-hours/model.
