0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Training in robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review of training modalities and objective and subjective assessment methods

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          The variety of robotic surgery systems, training modalities, and assessment tools within robotic surgery training is extensive. This systematic review aimed to comprehensively overview different training modalities and assessment methods for teaching and assessing surgical skills in robotic surgery, with a specific focus on comparing objective and subjective assessment methods.

          Methods

          A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. The electronic databases Pubmed, EMBASE, and Cochrane were searched from inception until February 1, 2022. Included studies consisted of robotic-assisted surgery training (e.g., box training, virtual reality training, cadaver training and animal tissue training) with an assessment method (objective or subjective), such as assessment forms, virtual reality scores, peer-to-peer feedback or time recording.

          Results

          The search identified 1591 studies. After abstract screening and full-texts examination, 209 studies were identified that focused on robotic surgery training and included an assessment tool. The majority of the studies utilized the da Vinci Surgical System, with dry lab training being the most common approach, followed by the da Vinci Surgical Skills Simulator. The most frequently used assessment methods included simulator scoring system (e.g., dVSS score), and assessment forms (e.g., GEARS and OSATS).

          Conclusion

          This systematic review provides an overview of training modalities and assessment methods in robotic-assisted surgery. Dry lab training on the da Vinci Surgical System and training on the da Vinci Skills Simulator are the predominant approaches. However, focused training on tissue handling, manipulation, and force interaction is lacking, despite the absence of haptic feedback. Future research should focus on developing universal objective assessment and feedback methods to address these limitations as the field continues to evolve.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-024-10915-7.

          Related collections

          Most cited references42

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The evolution of robotic surgery: surgical and anaesthetic aspects

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Improving patient safety in the operating theatre and perioperative care: obstacles, interventions, and priorities for accelerating progress.

              The publication of To Err Is Human in the USA and An Organisation with a Memory in the UK more than a decade ago put patient safety firmly on the clinical and policy agenda. To date, however, progress in improving safety and outcomes of hospitalized patients has been slower than the authors of these reports had envisaged. Here, we first review and analyse some of the reasons for the lack of evident progress in improving patient safety across healthcare specialities. We then focus on what we believe is a critical part of the healthcare system that can contribute to safety but also to error-healthcare teams. Finally, we review team training interventions and tools available for the assessment and improvement of team performance and we offer recommendations based on the existing evidence-base that have potential to improve patient safety and outcomes in the coming decade.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                a.rahimi@amsterdamumc.nl
                Journal
                Surg Endosc
                Surg Endosc
                Surgical Endoscopy
                Springer US (New York )
                0930-2794
                1432-2218
                30 May 2024
                30 May 2024
                2024
                : 38
                : 7
                : 3547-3555
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, ( https://ror.org/05grdyy37) Tafelbergweg 47, 1105 BD Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [2 ]Amsterdam Skills Centre for Health Sciences, Tafelbergweg 47, 1105 BD Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Cancer Center Amsterdam, ( https://ror.org/0286p1c86) Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5919-0599
                Article
                10915
                10.1007/s00464-024-10915-7
                11219449
                38814347
                47fe1c97-238a-4295-b2f8-69015e159df9
                © The Author(s) 2024

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 16 January 2024
                : 5 May 2024
                Categories
                Review Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2024

                Surgery
                robotic-assisted surgery,assessment methods,robotic surgery training,simulation training,objective assessment,subjective assessment

                Comments

                Comment on this article