Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

VIRTUAL URETEROSCOPY PREDICTS URETEROSCOPIC PROFICIENCY OF MEDICAL STUDENTS ON A CADAVER

2004; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 172; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1097/01.ju.0000131631.60022.d9

1527-3792

Kenneth Ogan, Lucas Jacomides, Michael J. Shulman, Claus G. Roehrborn, Jeffrey A. Cadeddu, Margaret S. Pearle,

Digital Imaging in Medicine

No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult Urology: Outcomes/Epidemiology/Socioeconomics1 Aug 2004VIRTUAL URETEROSCOPY PREDICTS URETEROSCOPIC PROFICIENCY OF MEDICAL STUDENTS ON A CADAVER KENNETH OGAN, LUCAS JACOMIDES, MICHAEL J. SHULMAN, CLAUS G. ROEHRBORN, JEFFREY A. CADEDDU, and MARGARET S. PEARLE KENNETH OGANKENNETH OGAN , LUCAS JACOMIDESLUCAS JACOMIDES , MICHAEL J. SHULMANMICHAEL J. SHULMAN , CLAUS G. ROEHRBORNCLAUS G. ROEHRBORN , JEFFREY A. CADEDDUJEFFREY A. CADEDDU , and MARGARET S. PEARLEMARGARET S. PEARLE View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000131631.60022.d9AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: Training on a virtual reality (VR) simulator has been shown to improve the performance of VR endoscopic tasks by novice endoscopists. However, to our knowledge the translation of VR skills into clinical endoscopic proficiency has not been demonstrated. We established criterion validity for a VR ureteroscopy simulator by evaluating VR trained subjects in a cadaver model. Materials and Methods: A total of 32 participants, including 16 medical students and 16 urology residents, were evaluated at baseline on a VR ureteroscopy simulator (Uromentor, Simbionix, Lod, Israel), performing simple diagnostic ureteroscopy. The students then underwent 5 hours of supervised training on the simulator. Two weeks later all participants were reevaluated (VR2) on the simulator when repeating the initial task. Each participant was then assessed on the performance of a similar diagnostic ureteroscopy in a male cadaver. Results: In medical students VR2 and cadaver performances correlated closely for several measured parameters (total time for task completion and overall global ratings score). In contrast, there was little correlation between the 2 performances in residents. Indeed, performance on the cadaver correlated more closely with the training level than VR2 scores. Despite VR training medical students were unable to perform cadaver ureteroscopy comparably to residents. Conclusions: For novice endoscopists performance on the simulator after training predicted operative (cadaver) performance and, thus, it may be useful for the education and assessment of physicians in training. However, VR training is unable to override the impact of clinical training, although it may help shorten the learning curve early in training. References 1 : The future of British urology. Br J Urol1998; 82: 476. Google Scholar 2 : Use of a virtual reality simulator for ureteroscopy training. J Urol2004; 171: 320. Link, Google Scholar 3 : A randomized, prospective blinded study validating the acquisition of ureteroscopy skills using a computer based virtual reality endourological simulator. J Urol2002; 168: 1928. Link, Google Scholar 4 : Reliability and construct validity of a structured technical skills assessment form. Am J Surg1994; 167: 423. Google Scholar 5 : Male pelvic anatomy reconstructed from the visible human data set. J Urol1998; 159: 868. Link, Google Scholar 6 : Virtual reality-based training for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng1999; 46: 1253. Google Scholar 7 : A computer generated interactive transurethral prostatic resection simulator. J Urol1999; 162: 1633. Link, Google Scholar 8 : Assessment of basic endoscopic performance using a virtual reality simulator. J Am Coll Surg2002; 195: 675. Google Scholar 9 : Assessing operative skill. Needs to become more objective. BMJ1999; 318: 887. Google Scholar 10 : Virtual reality surgical simulation in endoscopic urologic surgery. Stud Health Technol Inform1996; 29: 157. Medline, Google Scholar 11 : Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg2002; 236: 458. Google Scholar 12 : The financial impact of teaching surgical residents in the operating room. Am J Surg1999; 177: 28. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar From the Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, and Emory University Medical Center (KO), Atlanta, Georgia© 2004 by American Urological Association, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byAhmed K, Jawad M, Abboudi M, Gavazzi A, Darzi A, Athanasiou T, Vale J, Khan M and Dasgupta P (2011) Effectiveness of Procedural Simulation in Urology: A Systematic ReviewJournal of Urology, VOL. 186, NO. 1, (26-34), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2011.White M, DeHaan A, Stephens D, Maes A and Maatman T (2009) Validation of a High Fidelity Adult Ureteroscopy and Renoscopy SimulatorJournal of Urology, VOL. 183, NO. 2, (673-677), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2010.Wignall G, Denstedt J, Preminger G, Cadeddu J, Pearle M, Sweet R and McDougall E (2008) Surgical Simulation: A Urological PerspectiveJournal of Urology, VOL. 179, NO. 5, (1690-1699), Online publication date: 1-May-2008.Gettman M, Le C, Rangel L, Slezak J, Bergstralh E and Krambeck A (2007) Analysis of a Computer Based Simulator as an Educational Tool for Cystoscopy: Subjective and Objective ResultsJournal of Urology, VOL. 179, NO. 1, (267-271), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2008.Le C, Lightner D, VanderLei L, Segura J and Gettman M (2018) The Current Role of Medical Simulation in American Urological Residency Training Programs: An Assessment by Program DirectorsJournal of Urology, VOL. 177, NO. 1, (288-291), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2007.Duchene D, Moinzadeh A, Gill I, Clayman R and Winfield H (2018) Survey of Residency Training in Laparoscopic and Robotic SurgeryJournal of Urology, VOL. 176, NO. 5, (2158-2167), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2006.Knudsen B, Matsumoto E, Chew B, Johnson B, Margulis V, Cadeddu J, Pearle M, Pautler S and Denstedt J (2018) A Randomized, Controlled, Prospective Study Validating the Acquisition of Percutaneous Renal Collecting System Access Skills Using a Computer Based Hybrid Virtual Reality Surgical Simulator: Phase IJournal of Urology, VOL. 176, NO. 5, (2173-2178), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2006. Volume 172Issue 2August 2004Page: 667-671 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2004 by American Urological Association, Inc.Keywordscomputer simulationeducation, medicalureteroscopyureterMetricsAuthor Information KENNETH OGAN More articles by this author LUCAS JACOMIDES More articles by this author MICHAEL J. SHULMAN More articles by this author CLAUS G. ROEHRBORN More articles by this author JEFFREY A. CADEDDU More articles by this author MARGARET S. PEARLE More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...