Advertisement

Metrics for the Measurement of Skill

  • Anthony G. Gallagher
  • Gerald C. O’Sullivan
  • Gerald C. O’Sullivan
Chapter
Part of the Improving Medical Outcome - Zero Tolerance book series (IMOZT)

Abstract

The ‘Bristol Case’ (Senate of Surgery 1998) and the “To Err is Human” (Kohn et al. 2000) report have revealed a major deficiency in the area of surgical education, training, and assessment. Analysis revealed that there is no uniform or consistent training in surgical skills, either at a local or national level.

Keywords

Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Virtual Reality Operational Definition Task Analysis Surgical Skill 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adair JG. The Hawthorne effect: a reconsideration of the methodological artifact. J Appl Psychol. 1984;69(2):334-345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahlberg G, Enochsson L, Gallagher AG, et al. Proficiency-based virtual reality training significantly reduces the error rate for residents during their first 10 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Am J Surg. 2007;193(6):797-804.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Byrne D. Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity. J Abnorm Soc Psychol. 1961;62(3):713-715.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Catania A. Learning. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1984.Google Scholar
  5. Coleman J, Nduka CC, Darzi A. Virtual reality and laparoscopic surgery. Br J Surg. 1994;81(12):1709-1711.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Darzi A, Smith S, Taffinder N. Assessing operative skill. BMJ. 1999;318(7188):887.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Francis NK, Hanna GB, Cuschieri A. Reliability of the Dundee Endoscopic Psychomotor Tester (DEPT) for dominant hand performance. Surg Endosc. 2001;15(7):673-676.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Francis NK, Hanna GB, Cuschieri A. The performance of master surgeons on the Advanced Dundee Endoscopic Psychomotor Tester: contrast validity study. Arch Surg. 2002;137(7):841.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gallagher AG, Satava RM. Virtual reality as a metric for the assessment of laparoscopic psychomotor skills. Learning curves and reliability measures. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(12):1746-1752.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gallagher AG, McClure N, McGuigan J, Crothers I, Browning J. Virtual reality training in laparoscopic surgery: a preliminary assessment of minimally invasive surgical trainer virtual reality (MIST VR). Endoscopy. 1999;31(4):310-313.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gallagher AG, Hughes C, Reinhardt-Rutland AH, McGuigan J, McClure N. A case-control comparison of traditional and virtual-reality training in laparoscopic psychomotor performance. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2000;9(5):347-352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gallagher AG, Richie K, McClure N, McGuigan J. Objective psychomotor skills assessment of experienced, junior, and novice laparoscopists with virtual reality. World J Surg. 2001;25(11):1478-1483.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gallagher AG, Smith CD, Bowers SP, et al. Psychomotor skills assessment in practicing surgeons experienced in performing advanced laparoscopic procedures. J Am Coll Surg. 2003;197(3):479-488.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gallagher AG, Lederman AB, McGlade K, Satava RM, Smith CD. Discriminative validity of the minimally invasive surgical trainer in virtual reality (MIST-VR) using criteria levels based on expert performance. Surg Endosc. 2004;18(4):660-665.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gallagher AG, Neary P, Gillen P, et al. Novel method for assessment and selection of trainees for higher surgical training in general surgery. Aust N Z J Surg. 2008;78(4):282-290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gallagher AG, Leonard G, Traynor OJ. Role and feasibility of psychomotor and dexterity testing in selection for surgical training. Aust N Z J Surg. 2009;79(3):108-113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ghazisaedy M, Adamczyk D, Sandin DJ, Kenyon RV, DeFanti TA. Ultrasonic calibration of a magnetic tracker in a virtual realityspace. Proceedings of the IEEE Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium (VRAIS 95), Research Triangle Park, NC, March 1995.Google Scholar
  18. Gordon R. Great Medical Disasters. London: House of Stratus Ltd.; 2001.Google Scholar
  19. Hance J, Aggarwal R, Stanbridge R, et al. Objective assessment of technical skills in cardiac surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2005;28(1):157-162.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanna GB, Drew T, Clinch P, Hunter B, Cuschieri A. Computer-controlled endoscopic performance assessment system. Surg Endosc. 1998;12(7):997-1000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jordan JA, Gallagher AG, McGuigan J, McClure N. Randomly alternating image presentation during laparoscopic training leads to faster automation to the “fulcrum effect”. Endoscopy. 2000;32(4):317-321.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jordan JA, Gallagher AG, McGuigan J, McClure N. Virtual reality training leads to faster adaptation to the novel psychomotor restrictions encountered by laparoscopic surgeons. Surg Endosc. 2001;15(10):1080-1084.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kazdin AE. Behavior Modification in Applied Settings. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.; 1994.Google Scholar
  24. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington: National Academy Press; 2000:196-197.Google Scholar
  25. Landsberger HA. Hawthorne Revisited. New York: Cornell University Press; 1968.Google Scholar
  26. Larsen CR, Grantcharov T, Aggarwal R, et al. Objective assessment of gynecologic laparoscopic skills using the LapSimGyn virtual reality simulator. Surg Endosc. 2006;20(9):1460-1466.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Luchins AS. Primacy-recency in impression formation. In: Hovland CI, ed. The Order of Presentation in Persuasion. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1957:33-61.Google Scholar
  28. Martin JA, Regehr G, Reznick R, et al. Objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) for surgical residents. Br J Surg. 1997;84(2):273-278.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Meyer K, Applewhite HL, Biocca FA. A survey of position trackers. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments. 1992;1(2):173-200.Google Scholar
  30. Nixon MA, McCallum BC, Fright WR, Price NB. The effects of metals and interfering fields on electromagnetic trackers. Presence. 1998;7(2):204-218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pearson AM, Gallagher AG, Rosser JC, Satava RM. Evaluation of structured and quantitative training methods for teaching intracorporeal knot tying. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(1):130-137.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Perloff RM. The Dynamics of Persuasion. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2008.Google Scholar
  33. Raab FH, Blood EB, Steiner TO, Jones HR. Magnetic position and orientation tracking system. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Sys. 1979;AES-15(5):709-718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reber AS, Reber ES. The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology. London: Penguin Books; 1985.Google Scholar
  35. Regenbogen SE, Greenberg CC, Studdert DM, Lipsitz SR, Zinner MJ, Gawande AA. Patterns of technical error among surgical malpractice claims: an analysis of strategies to prevent injury to surgical patients. Ann Surg. 2007;246(5):705.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Riva G. Applications of virtual environments in medicine. Methods Inf Med. 2003;42(5):524-534.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Satava RM. Virtual reality surgical simulator. The first steps. Surg Endosc. 1993;7(3):203-205.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Senate of Surgery. Response to the General Medical Council Determination on the Bristol Case: Senate Paper 5. London: The Senate of Surgery of Great Britain and Ireland; 1998.Google Scholar
  39. Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, et al. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg. 2002;236(4):458-463; discussion 463-454.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Smith SG, Torkington J, Brown TJ, Taffinder NJ, Darzi A. Motion analysis: a tool for assessing laparoscopic dexterity in the performance of a laboratory-based laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2002;16:640-645.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Spencer F. Teaching and measuring surgical techniques: the technical evaluation of competence. Bull Am Coll Surg. 1978;63:9-12.Google Scholar
  42. Taffinder N, Sutton C, Fishwick R, McManus I, Darzi A. Validation of virtual reality to teach and assess psychomotor skills in laparoscopic surgery: results from randomised controlled studies using the MIST VR laparoscopic simulator. Stud Health Technol Inform. 1998;50:124-130.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Van Sickle K, Ritter EM, Baghai M, et al. Prospective, randomized, double-blind trial of curriculum-based training for intracorporeal suturing and knot tying. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;207(4):560-568.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wilson MS, Middlebrook A, Sutton C, Stone R, McCloy RF. MIST VR: a virtual reality trainer for laparoscopic surgery assesses performance. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1997;79(6):403-404.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anthony G. Gallagher
    • 1
  • Gerald C. O’Sullivan
    • 2
  • Gerald C. O’Sullivan
    • 3
  1. 1.School of MedicineUniversity College CorkCorkIreland
  2. 2.Mercy University HospitalCorkIreland
  3. 3.Cork Cancer Research CentreUniversity College CorkCorkIreland

Personalised recommendations