Accelerated Skills Acquisition Protocol (ASAP) in optimizing robotic surgical simulation training: a prospective randomized study

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the efficacy of an accelerated proficiency-based training protocol in robotic simulation practice in delivering durable proficiency compared to conventional training methods.

Methods

Novice medical students (n = 16) were randomized into either the accelerated skills acquisition protocol (ASAP) or conventional training protocol (CTP). Subjects were trained to proficiency on the da Vinci Skills Simulator (dVSS) by an expert trainer. Differences in the repetitions required to achieve proficiency in two simple and two complex virtual reality (VR) training tasks were assessed as the primary outcome measure. Transfer of the acquired skills to two other non-practiced tasks was assessed immediately and prospectively followed through to 3, 6 and 12 months in the two groups. Retention of the practiced tasks was assessed along the same timeframe.

Results

Subjects in the ASAP group acquired proficiency significantly faster in three of the four training tasks: camera control (p = 0.0002), suture sponge (p < 0.0001), ring walk3 (p < 0.0001), and peg board (p = 0.6936). When assessing transfer of skills, there were no significant differences between the two groups: Ring rail 3 (p = 0.6807) and Tubes (p = 0.2240). When assessing retention of skills at 3, 6 and 12 months, for all 6 tasks, no significant differences were seen between the ASAP and CTP groups.

Conclusion

ASAP is proven to be an efficient approach for delivering proficiency in robotic VR simulation training. The results are durable when compared to conventional simulation training methods. The findings may have significant implications in the design of robotic VR simulation curricula.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. 1.

    Torkington J et al (2001) The role of the basic surgical skills course in the acquisition and retention of laparoscopic skill. Surg Endosc 15(10):1071–1075

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Reznick RK, MacRae H (2006) Teaching surgical skills–changes in the wind. N Engl J Med 355(25):2664–2669

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Dawe SR et al (2014) Systematic review of skills transfer after surgical simulation-based training. Br J Surg 101(9):1063–1076

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Stefanidis D et al (2008) Challenges during the implementation of a laparoscopic skills curriculum in a busy general surgery residency program. J Surg Educ 65(1):4–7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Chang L et al (2007) Integrating simulation into a surgical residency program: is voluntary participation effective? Surg Endosc 21(3):418–421

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Stefanidis D, Acker CE, Greene FL (2010) Performance goals on simulators boost resident motivation and skills laboratory attendance. J Surg Educ 67(2):66–70

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    van Dongen KW et al (2008) Virtual reality training for endoscopic surgery: voluntary or obligatory? Surg Endosc 22(3):664–667

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Schneider JR et al (2007) Implementation and evaluation of a new surgical residency model. J Am Coll Surg 205(3):393–404

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Moglia A et al (2016) A systematic review of virtual reality simulators for robot-assisted surgery. Eur Urol 69(6):1065–1080

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Intuitive Surgical (2018) Investor relations. https://isrg.intuitive.com/static-files/8bbddc9e-579c-47a1-ac91-fabe26e5e278. Accessed 9 Oct 2018

  11. 11.

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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Lyons C et al (2013) Which skills really matter? proving face, content, and construct validity for a commercial robotic simulator. Surg Endosc 27(6):2020–2030

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Stefanidis D, Acker C, Heniford BT (2008) Proficiency-based laparoscopic simulator training leads to improved operating room skill that is resistant to decay. Surg Innov 15(1):69–73

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Kelly DC et al (2012) Face, content, and construct validation of the da Vinci skills simulator. Urology 79(5):1068–1072

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Ericsson KA, Krampe RT, Tesch-Romer C (1993) The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol Rev 100(3):363–406

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Seymour NE et al (2002) Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg 236(4):458–663 (discussion 463–4)

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Foell K et al (2013) Robotic surgery basic skills training: Evaluation of a pilot multidisciplinary simulation-based curriculum. Can Urol Assoc J 7(11–12):430–434

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Brewin J, Ahmed K, Challacombe B (2014) An update and review of simulation in urological training. Int J Surg 12(2):103–108

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Smith R, Patel V, Satava R (2014) Fundamentals of robotic surgery: a course of basic robotic surgery skills based upon a 14-society consensus template of outcomes measures and curriculum development. Int J Med Robot 10(3):379–384

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Ahmed K et al (2015) Development of a standardised training curriculum for robotic surgery: a consensus statement from an international multidisciplinary group of experts. BJU Int 116(1):93–101

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Magill RA (2010) Motor learning and control: concepts and applications, vol 9. McGraw-Hill Humanities, New York

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Martin V, Scholz JP, Schoner G (2009) Redundancy, self-motion, and motor control. Neural Comput 21(5):1371–1414

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Sweller J (1988) Cognitive load during problem solving: effects on learning. Cogn Sci 12:257–285

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    van Merrienboer JJ, Sweller J (2010) Cognitive load theory in health professional education: design principles and strategies. Med Educ 44(1):85–93

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Fraser KL, Ayres P, Sweller J (2015) Cognitive load theory for the design of medical simulations. Simul Healthc 10(5):295–307

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Dias RD et al (2018) Systematic review of measurement tools to assess surgeons' intraoperative cognitive workload. Br J Surg 105(5):491–501

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Stefanidis D et al (2006) Proficiency maintenance: impact of ongoing simulator training on laparoscopic skill retention. J Am Coll Surg 202(4):599–603

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Park SW, Dijkstra TM, Sternad D (2013) Learning to never forget-time scales and specificity of long-term memory of a motor skill. Front Comput Neurosci 7:111

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Lohse KR et al (2014) Motor skill acquisition across short and long time scales: a meta-analysis of neuroimaging data. Neuropsychologia 59:130–141

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

PMSG: manuscript writing, data analysis. TC: data collection, manuscript revision. BW: statistical analysis. JVJ: manuscript revision, supervision. AEG: project conceptualization and management, manuscript revision, supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmed E. Ghazi.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Human and animal rights

The study was conducted with IRB approval.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all the participants prior to the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gurung, P.M.S., Campbell, T., Wang, B. et al. Accelerated Skills Acquisition Protocol (ASAP) in optimizing robotic surgical simulation training: a prospective randomized study. World J Urol 38, 1623–1630 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02858-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Robotic surgery
  • Robotic simulation
  • Surgical training