SIMULATION TRAINING

Comprehensive simulation-enhanced training curriculum for an advanced procedure

A randomized controlled trial

A randomized controlled trial

A randomized controlled trial

Published on

December 2, 2016

Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases

Boris Zevin, Nicolas J. Dedy, Esther M. Bonrath, Teodor P. Grantcharov
Boris Zevin, Nicolas J. Dedy, Esther M. Bonrath, Teodor P. Grantcharov
Boris Zevin, Nicolas J. Dedy, Esther M. Bonrath, Teodor P. Grantcharov

Overview

This study addresses the lack of a comprehensive simulation-enhanced training (SET) curriculum for advanced minimally invasive procedures by developing and validating such a program. A prospective single-blinded, randomized controlled trial was conducted at a university, involving 20 intermediate-level surgery residents who were assigned to either conventional training or the SET curriculum. The primary outcome focused on psychomotor skills demonstrated in a live porcine model, while secondary outcomes assessed knowledge and nontechnical skills in simulated scenarios.

Results indicated that the SET curriculum significantly improved psychomotor skills and nontechnical skills compared to conventional training, while knowledge levels remained comparable between the groups. Furthermore, when comparing the SET group to chief residents, the SET group showed similar psychomotor skills but inferior knowledge, though they excelled in nontechnical skills. Overall, the SET curriculum led to better training outcomes, suggesting its potential to standardize and enhance proficiency in advanced minimally invasive procedures before residents engage in patient care.

Results

SET curriculum group demonstrated superior psychomotor skills in a live porcine model (56 [47-62] versus 44 [38-53], P<.05) and superior nontechnical skills (41 [38-45] versus 31 [24-40], P<.01) compared with conventional training group. SET curriculum group and conventional training group demonstrated equivalent knowledge (14 [12-15] versus 13 [11-15], P = 0.47). SET curriculum group demonstrated equivalent psychomotor skills in the live porcine model and in the OR in a human patient (56 [47-62] versus 63 [61-68]; P = .21). SET curriculum group demonstrated inferior knowledge (13 [11-15] versus 16 [14-16]; P<.05), equivalent psychomotor skill (63 [61-68] versus 68 [62-74]; P = .50), and superior nontechnical skills (41 [38-45] versus 34 [27-35], P<.01) compared with chief resident group.