Validation of the AUA BLUS Tasks

Purpose Standardized assessment of laparoscopic skill in urology is lacking. We investigated whether the AUA (American Urological Association) BLUS (Basic Laparoscopic Urologic Skills) skill tasks are valid to address this need. Materials and Methods This institutional review board approved study in...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of urology 2016-04, Vol.195 (4), p.998-1005
Hauptverfasser: Kowalewski, Timothy M, Sweet, Robert, Lendvay, Thomas S, Menhadji, Ashleigh, Averch, Timothy, Box, Geoffrey, Brand, Timothy, Ferrandino, Michael, Kaouk, Jihad, Knudsen, Bodo, Landman, Jaime, Lee, Benjamin, Schwartz, Bradley F, McDougall, Elspeth
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose Standardized assessment of laparoscopic skill in urology is lacking. We investigated whether the AUA (American Urological Association) BLUS (Basic Laparoscopic Urologic Skills) skill tasks are valid to address this need. Materials and Methods This institutional review board approved study included 27 medical students, 42 urology residents, 18 fellows and 37 faculty urologists across 8 sites. Using the EDGE (Electronic Data Generation and Evaluation) device (Simulab, Seattle, Washington) 454 recordings were collected on peg transfer, pattern cutting, suturing and clip applying tasks, which together comprise the expert determined BLUS tasks. We collected synchronized video and tool motion data for each trial. For each task errors, time, path length, economy of motion, peak grasp force and EDGE score were collected. An expert panel of 5 faculty members performed GOALS (Global Objective Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills) evaluations on a representative subset of peg transfer and suturing skill tasks performed by 24 participants (IRR = 0.95). Results Demographically derived skill levels proved unsuitable to evaluate construct validity. Separation of mean scores by grouped skill levels was strongest for the suturing task. Objective motion metrics and errors supported construct validity vis-à-vis correlation with blinded expert video ratings (motion metrics R2 = 0.95, p
ISSN:0022-5347
1527-3792
DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2015.10.087