Cargando…
Simulator Fidelity Does Not Affect Training for Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery
This study was undertaken to compare performance using a surgical robot after training with one of three simulators of varying fidelity. Methods: Eight novice operators and eight expert surgeons were randomly assigned to one of three simulators. Each participant performed two exercises using a simul...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10095363/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37048640 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12072557 |
_version_ | 1785024065674674176 |
---|---|
author | Saito, Shin Endo, Kazuhiro Sakuma, Yasunaru Sata, Naohiro Lefor, Alan Kawarai |
author_facet | Saito, Shin Endo, Kazuhiro Sakuma, Yasunaru Sata, Naohiro Lefor, Alan Kawarai |
author_sort | Saito, Shin |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study was undertaken to compare performance using a surgical robot after training with one of three simulators of varying fidelity. Methods: Eight novice operators and eight expert surgeons were randomly assigned to one of three simulators. Each participant performed two exercises using a simulator and then using a surgical robot. The primary outcome of this study is performance assessed by time and GEARS score. Results: Participants were randomly assigned to one of three simulators. Time to perform the suturing exercise (novices vs. experts) was significantly different for all 3 simulators. Using the da Vinci robot, peg transfer showed no significant difference between novices and experts and all participants combined (mean time novice 2.00, expert 2.21, p = 0.920). The suture exercise had significant differences in each group and all participants combined (novice 3.54, expert 1.90, p = 0.001). ANOVA showed p-Values for suturing (novice 0.523, expert 0.123) and peg transfer (novice 0.742, expert 0.131) are not significantly different. GEARS scores were different (p < 0.05) for novices and experts. Conclusion: Training with simulators of varying fidelity result in similar performance using the da Vinci robot. A dry box simulator may be as effective as a virtual reality simulator for training. Further studies are needed to validate these results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10095363 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100953632023-04-13 Simulator Fidelity Does Not Affect Training for Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery Saito, Shin Endo, Kazuhiro Sakuma, Yasunaru Sata, Naohiro Lefor, Alan Kawarai J Clin Med Article This study was undertaken to compare performance using a surgical robot after training with one of three simulators of varying fidelity. Methods: Eight novice operators and eight expert surgeons were randomly assigned to one of three simulators. Each participant performed two exercises using a simulator and then using a surgical robot. The primary outcome of this study is performance assessed by time and GEARS score. Results: Participants were randomly assigned to one of three simulators. Time to perform the suturing exercise (novices vs. experts) was significantly different for all 3 simulators. Using the da Vinci robot, peg transfer showed no significant difference between novices and experts and all participants combined (mean time novice 2.00, expert 2.21, p = 0.920). The suture exercise had significant differences in each group and all participants combined (novice 3.54, expert 1.90, p = 0.001). ANOVA showed p-Values for suturing (novice 0.523, expert 0.123) and peg transfer (novice 0.742, expert 0.131) are not significantly different. GEARS scores were different (p < 0.05) for novices and experts. Conclusion: Training with simulators of varying fidelity result in similar performance using the da Vinci robot. A dry box simulator may be as effective as a virtual reality simulator for training. Further studies are needed to validate these results. MDPI 2023-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10095363/ /pubmed/37048640 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12072557 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Saito, Shin Endo, Kazuhiro Sakuma, Yasunaru Sata, Naohiro Lefor, Alan Kawarai Simulator Fidelity Does Not Affect Training for Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery |
title | Simulator Fidelity Does Not Affect Training for Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery |
title_full | Simulator Fidelity Does Not Affect Training for Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery |
title_fullStr | Simulator Fidelity Does Not Affect Training for Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery |
title_full_unstemmed | Simulator Fidelity Does Not Affect Training for Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery |
title_short | Simulator Fidelity Does Not Affect Training for Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery |
title_sort | simulator fidelity does not affect training for robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10095363/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37048640 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12072557 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT saitoshin simulatorfidelitydoesnotaffecttrainingforrobotassistedminimallyinvasivesurgery AT endokazuhiro simulatorfidelitydoesnotaffecttrainingforrobotassistedminimallyinvasivesurgery AT sakumayasunaru simulatorfidelitydoesnotaffecttrainingforrobotassistedminimallyinvasivesurgery AT satanaohiro simulatorfidelitydoesnotaffecttrainingforrobotassistedminimallyinvasivesurgery AT leforalankawarai simulatorfidelitydoesnotaffecttrainingforrobotassistedminimallyinvasivesurgery |