Assessment of Virtual Reality Robotic Simulation Performance by Urology Resident Trainees

Objectives To examine resident performance on the Mimic dV-Trainer (MdVT; Mimic Technologies, Inc., Seattle, WA) for correlation with resident trainee level (postgraduate year [PGY]), console experience (CE), and simulator exposure in their training program to assess for internal bias with the simul...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of surgical education 2014-05, Vol.71 (3), p.302-308
Hauptverfasser: Ruparel, Raaj K., MD, Taylor, Abby S., MD, Patel, Janil, BS, Patel, Vipul R., MD, Heckman, Michael G., MS, Rawal, Bhupendra, MS, Leveillee, Raymond J., MD, Thiel, David D., MD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 308
container_issue 3
container_start_page 302
container_title Journal of surgical education
container_volume 71
creator Ruparel, Raaj K., MD
Taylor, Abby S., MD
Patel, Janil, BS
Patel, Vipul R., MD
Heckman, Michael G., MS
Rawal, Bhupendra, MS
Leveillee, Raymond J., MD
Thiel, David D., MD
description Objectives To examine resident performance on the Mimic dV-Trainer (MdVT; Mimic Technologies, Inc., Seattle, WA) for correlation with resident trainee level (postgraduate year [PGY]), console experience (CE), and simulator exposure in their training program to assess for internal bias with the simulator. Design Residents from programs of the Southeastern Section of the American Urologic Association participated. Each resident was scored on 4 simulator tasks (peg board, camera targeting, energy dissection [ED], and needle targeting) with 3 different outcomes (final score, economy of motion score, and time to complete exercise) measured for each task. These scores were evaluated for association with PGY, CE, and simulator exposure. Setting Robotic skills training laboratory. Participants A total of 27 residents from 14 programs of the Southeastern Section of the American Urologic Association participated. Results Time to complete the ED exercise was significantly shorter for residents who had logged live robotic console compared with those who had not (p = 0.003). There were no other associations with live robotic console time that approached significance (all p ≥ 0.21). The only measure that was significantly associated with PGY was time to complete ED exercise (p = 0.009). No associations with previous utilization of a robotic simulator in the resident’s home training program were statistically significant. Conclusions The ED exercise on the MdVT is most associated with CE and PGY compared with other exercises. Exposure of trainees to the MdVT in training programs does not appear to alter performance scores compared with trainees who do not have the simulator.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.09.009
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1521912629</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1931720413002274</els_id><sourcerecordid>1521912629</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c414t-1585fe6ef61e42ef6c9b406f9806668a6da1c316527b3d3da5eb45bf89a456f23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkctu1jAQRi1ERS_wBEgoSzYJvidegFRVpSBVouoFiZXlOOPKwYmLnSD9b4_DX7rohtXM4nwzmjMIvSW4IZjID2Mz5jXdNxQT1mDVYKxeoCPStV3dckFfll4xUrcU80N0nPOIseCKqlfokPJWtR3nR-jHac6Q8wTzUkVXffdpWU2orsEEv-yq69jHxdvqxk9rMIuPc3UFycU0mdlC1e-quxRDvC8kZD9sU26T8TNAfo0OnAkZ3jzWE3T3-fz27Et9-e3i69npZW054UtNRCccSHCSAKelWNVzLJ3qsJSyM3IwxDIiBW17NrDBCOi56F2nDBfSUXaC3u_nPqT4a4W86MlnCyGYGeKaNRGUKEIlVQVle9SmmHMCpx-Sn0zaaYL15lSP-q9TvTnVWOnitKTePS5Y-wmGp8w_iQX4uAegnPnbQ9LZeih-Bp_ALnqI_j8LPj3L2-Bnb034CTvIY1zTXAxqojPVWN9sb92-ShjGlLac_QHO257Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1521912629</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Assessment of Virtual Reality Robotic Simulation Performance by Urology Resident Trainees</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Ruparel, Raaj K., MD ; Taylor, Abby S., MD ; Patel, Janil, BS ; Patel, Vipul R., MD ; Heckman, Michael G., MS ; Rawal, Bhupendra, MS ; Leveillee, Raymond J., MD ; Thiel, David D., MD</creator><creatorcontrib>Ruparel, Raaj K., MD ; Taylor, Abby S., MD ; Patel, Janil, BS ; Patel, Vipul R., MD ; Heckman, Michael G., MS ; Rawal, Bhupendra, MS ; Leveillee, Raymond J., MD ; Thiel, David D., MD</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives To examine resident performance on the Mimic dV-Trainer (MdVT; Mimic Technologies, Inc., Seattle, WA) for correlation with resident trainee level (postgraduate year [PGY]), console experience (CE), and simulator exposure in their training program to assess for internal bias with the simulator. Design Residents from programs of the Southeastern Section of the American Urologic Association participated. Each resident was scored on 4 simulator tasks (peg board, camera targeting, energy dissection [ED], and needle targeting) with 3 different outcomes (final score, economy of motion score, and time to complete exercise) measured for each task. These scores were evaluated for association with PGY, CE, and simulator exposure. Setting Robotic skills training laboratory. Participants A total of 27 residents from 14 programs of the Southeastern Section of the American Urologic Association participated. Results Time to complete the ED exercise was significantly shorter for residents who had logged live robotic console compared with those who had not (p = 0.003). There were no other associations with live robotic console time that approached significance (all p ≥ 0.21). The only measure that was significantly associated with PGY was time to complete ED exercise (p = 0.009). No associations with previous utilization of a robotic simulator in the resident’s home training program were statistically significant. Conclusions The ED exercise on the MdVT is most associated with CE and PGY compared with other exercises. Exposure of trainees to the MdVT in training programs does not appear to alter performance scores compared with trainees who do not have the simulator.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1931-7204</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-7452</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.09.009</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24797844</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Internship and Residency ; Medical Knowledge ; Professionalism ; Prostatectomy - education ; resident training ; robotic prostatectomy ; robotic surgery ; robotic training ; Robotics ; simulation ; Surgery ; Urology - education ; User-Computer Interface</subject><ispartof>Journal of surgical education, 2014-05, Vol.71 (3), p.302-308</ispartof><rights>Association of Program Directors in Surgery</rights><rights>2014 Association of Program Directors in Surgery</rights><rights>2013 Published by Association of Program Directors in Surgery on behalf of Association of Program Directors in Surgery.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c414t-1585fe6ef61e42ef6c9b406f9806668a6da1c316527b3d3da5eb45bf89a456f23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c414t-1585fe6ef61e42ef6c9b406f9806668a6da1c316527b3d3da5eb45bf89a456f23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1931720413002274$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24797844$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ruparel, Raaj K., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taylor, Abby S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patel, Janil, BS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patel, Vipul R., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heckman, Michael G., MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rawal, Bhupendra, MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leveillee, Raymond J., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thiel, David D., MD</creatorcontrib><title>Assessment of Virtual Reality Robotic Simulation Performance by Urology Resident Trainees</title><title>Journal of surgical education</title><addtitle>J Surg Educ</addtitle><description>Objectives To examine resident performance on the Mimic dV-Trainer (MdVT; Mimic Technologies, Inc., Seattle, WA) for correlation with resident trainee level (postgraduate year [PGY]), console experience (CE), and simulator exposure in their training program to assess for internal bias with the simulator. Design Residents from programs of the Southeastern Section of the American Urologic Association participated. Each resident was scored on 4 simulator tasks (peg board, camera targeting, energy dissection [ED], and needle targeting) with 3 different outcomes (final score, economy of motion score, and time to complete exercise) measured for each task. These scores were evaluated for association with PGY, CE, and simulator exposure. Setting Robotic skills training laboratory. Participants A total of 27 residents from 14 programs of the Southeastern Section of the American Urologic Association participated. Results Time to complete the ED exercise was significantly shorter for residents who had logged live robotic console compared with those who had not (p = 0.003). There were no other associations with live robotic console time that approached significance (all p ≥ 0.21). The only measure that was significantly associated with PGY was time to complete ED exercise (p = 0.009). No associations with previous utilization of a robotic simulator in the resident’s home training program were statistically significant. Conclusions The ED exercise on the MdVT is most associated with CE and PGY compared with other exercises. Exposure of trainees to the MdVT in training programs does not appear to alter performance scores compared with trainees who do not have the simulator.</description><subject>Internship and Residency</subject><subject>Medical Knowledge</subject><subject>Professionalism</subject><subject>Prostatectomy - education</subject><subject>resident training</subject><subject>robotic prostatectomy</subject><subject>robotic surgery</subject><subject>robotic training</subject><subject>Robotics</subject><subject>simulation</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Urology - education</subject><subject>User-Computer Interface</subject><issn>1931-7204</issn><issn>1878-7452</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkctu1jAQRi1ERS_wBEgoSzYJvidegFRVpSBVouoFiZXlOOPKwYmLnSD9b4_DX7rohtXM4nwzmjMIvSW4IZjID2Mz5jXdNxQT1mDVYKxeoCPStV3dckFfll4xUrcU80N0nPOIseCKqlfokPJWtR3nR-jHac6Q8wTzUkVXffdpWU2orsEEv-yq69jHxdvqxk9rMIuPc3UFycU0mdlC1e-quxRDvC8kZD9sU26T8TNAfo0OnAkZ3jzWE3T3-fz27Et9-e3i69npZW054UtNRCccSHCSAKelWNVzLJ3qsJSyM3IwxDIiBW17NrDBCOi56F2nDBfSUXaC3u_nPqT4a4W86MlnCyGYGeKaNRGUKEIlVQVle9SmmHMCpx-Sn0zaaYL15lSP-q9TvTnVWOnitKTePS5Y-wmGp8w_iQX4uAegnPnbQ9LZeih-Bp_ALnqI_j8LPj3L2-Bnb034CTvIY1zTXAxqojPVWN9sb92-ShjGlLac_QHO257Q</recordid><startdate>20140501</startdate><enddate>20140501</enddate><creator>Ruparel, Raaj K., MD</creator><creator>Taylor, Abby S., MD</creator><creator>Patel, Janil, BS</creator><creator>Patel, Vipul R., MD</creator><creator>Heckman, Michael G., MS</creator><creator>Rawal, Bhupendra, MS</creator><creator>Leveillee, Raymond J., MD</creator><creator>Thiel, David D., MD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140501</creationdate><title>Assessment of Virtual Reality Robotic Simulation Performance by Urology Resident Trainees</title><author>Ruparel, Raaj K., MD ; Taylor, Abby S., MD ; Patel, Janil, BS ; Patel, Vipul R., MD ; Heckman, Michael G., MS ; Rawal, Bhupendra, MS ; Leveillee, Raymond J., MD ; Thiel, David D., MD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c414t-1585fe6ef61e42ef6c9b406f9806668a6da1c316527b3d3da5eb45bf89a456f23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Internship and Residency</topic><topic>Medical Knowledge</topic><topic>Professionalism</topic><topic>Prostatectomy - education</topic><topic>resident training</topic><topic>robotic prostatectomy</topic><topic>robotic surgery</topic><topic>robotic training</topic><topic>Robotics</topic><topic>simulation</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Urology - education</topic><topic>User-Computer Interface</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ruparel, Raaj K., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taylor, Abby S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patel, Janil, BS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patel, Vipul R., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heckman, Michael G., MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rawal, Bhupendra, MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leveillee, Raymond J., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thiel, David D., MD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of surgical education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ruparel, Raaj K., MD</au><au>Taylor, Abby S., MD</au><au>Patel, Janil, BS</au><au>Patel, Vipul R., MD</au><au>Heckman, Michael G., MS</au><au>Rawal, Bhupendra, MS</au><au>Leveillee, Raymond J., MD</au><au>Thiel, David D., MD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Assessment of Virtual Reality Robotic Simulation Performance by Urology Resident Trainees</atitle><jtitle>Journal of surgical education</jtitle><addtitle>J Surg Educ</addtitle><date>2014-05-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>71</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>302</spage><epage>308</epage><pages>302-308</pages><issn>1931-7204</issn><eissn>1878-7452</eissn><abstract>Objectives To examine resident performance on the Mimic dV-Trainer (MdVT; Mimic Technologies, Inc., Seattle, WA) for correlation with resident trainee level (postgraduate year [PGY]), console experience (CE), and simulator exposure in their training program to assess for internal bias with the simulator. Design Residents from programs of the Southeastern Section of the American Urologic Association participated. Each resident was scored on 4 simulator tasks (peg board, camera targeting, energy dissection [ED], and needle targeting) with 3 different outcomes (final score, economy of motion score, and time to complete exercise) measured for each task. These scores were evaluated for association with PGY, CE, and simulator exposure. Setting Robotic skills training laboratory. Participants A total of 27 residents from 14 programs of the Southeastern Section of the American Urologic Association participated. Results Time to complete the ED exercise was significantly shorter for residents who had logged live robotic console compared with those who had not (p = 0.003). There were no other associations with live robotic console time that approached significance (all p ≥ 0.21). The only measure that was significantly associated with PGY was time to complete ED exercise (p = 0.009). No associations with previous utilization of a robotic simulator in the resident’s home training program were statistically significant. Conclusions The ED exercise on the MdVT is most associated with CE and PGY compared with other exercises. Exposure of trainees to the MdVT in training programs does not appear to alter performance scores compared with trainees who do not have the simulator.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>24797844</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.09.009</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1931-7204
ispartof Journal of surgical education, 2014-05, Vol.71 (3), p.302-308
issn 1931-7204
1878-7452
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1521912629
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Internship and Residency
Medical Knowledge
Professionalism
Prostatectomy - education
resident training
robotic prostatectomy
robotic surgery
robotic training
Robotics
simulation
Surgery
Urology - education
User-Computer Interface
title Assessment of Virtual Reality Robotic Simulation Performance by Urology Resident Trainees
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T01%3A16%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Assessment%20of%20Virtual%20Reality%20Robotic%20Simulation%20Performance%20by%20Urology%20Resident%20Trainees&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20surgical%20education&rft.au=Ruparel,%20Raaj%20K.,%20MD&rft.date=2014-05-01&rft.volume=71&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=302&rft.epage=308&rft.pages=302-308&rft.issn=1931-7204&rft.eissn=1878-7452&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.09.009&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1521912629%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1521912629&rft_id=info:pmid/24797844&rft_els_id=S1931720413002274&rfr_iscdi=true