Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Learning curves and impact of psychomotor training on performance in simulated colonoscopy: a randomized trial using a virtual reality endoscopy trainer.

      Surgical Endoscopy
      Clinical Competence, Colonoscopy, standards, Computer Simulation, Computer-Assisted Instruction, Endoscopy, education, Humans, Psychomotor Performance

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      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

          The aim of this study was to analyze the learning curve for the GI Mentor II endoscope trainer and to determine whether psychomotor training can contribute to an improvement in the performance of virtual colonoscopy. To analyze the learning curve, 28 subjects were divided into three groups on the basis of their experience with gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy: experienced surgeons (group 1, performed > 200 endoscopic procedures, (n = 8)) residents (group 2, performed < 50 endoscopic procedures, (n = 10)); and medical students (group 3, never performed GI endoscopy, (n = 10)). The participants were tested on the GI Mentor II virtual reality simulator 10 consecutive times. Assessment of the learning curve was based on the following three parameters: time used, number of punctured balloons, and number of wall collisions. In the second part of the study, 20 subjects who had never performed GI endoscopy were included. After performing a virtual colonoscopy, they were randomized to a group that received psychomotor training and a control group. Finally, all subjects performed a virtual colonoscopy. Assessment of endoscopic skills during the colonoscopy was based on nine parameters dealing with psychomotor skills. The learning curve for time expended reached a plateau after the second repetition for group 1 (Friedman's test, p < 0.05), after the fifth repetition for group 2 (p < 0.05), and after the seventh repetition for group 3 (p < 0.05). Experienced surgeons did not improve their scores for regarding number of balloons punctured or number of wall collisions (p > 0.05), indicating the absence of a learning curve for these parameters. Group 2 improved their scores up to the fourth and fifth repetitions, respectively (p < 0.05), and group 3 up to the fifth and seventh repetitions, respectively (p < 0.05). Experienced surgeons achieved the best performance, followed by group 2 and then group 3. The surgeons who had received psychomotor training performed the second virtual colonoscopy significantly faster than the control group (Mann-Whitney test, p < 0.001) and made significantly greater improvement in all other parameters as well. There were different learning curves for surgeons depending on their endoscopic background. The familiarization rate on the simulator was proportional to the endoscopic experience of the surgeons. Psychomotor training had a significant effect on the performance of a simulated colonoscopy.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          15791380
          10.1007/s00464-003-9264-9

          Chemistry
          Clinical Competence,Colonoscopy,standards,Computer Simulation,Computer-Assisted Instruction,Endoscopy,education,Humans,Psychomotor Performance

          Comments

          Comment on this article

          scite_
          0
          0
          0
          0
          Smart Citations
          0
          0
          0
          0
          Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
          View Citations

          See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

          scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

          Similar content118

          Cited by16