Van Herzeele Isabelle, Aggarwal Rajesh, Neequaye Simon, Darzi Ara, Vermassen Frank, Cheshire Nicholas J
Department of Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
J Vasc Surg. 2008 Nov;48(5):1223-30, 1230.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2008.06.034. Epub 2008 Sep 4.
OBJECTIVES: Virtual reality (VR) simulation has been suggested to objectively assess endovascular skills. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of cognitive training on technical performance of inexperienced subjects on a commercially available VR simulator (VIST, Vascular Intervention Simulation Trainer, Mentice, Gothenburg, Sweden). METHODS: Forty-seven subjects treated an identical virtual iliac artery stenosis endovascularly. Surgical trainees without endovascular experience were allocated to two training protocols: group A(1) (n = 10) received a 45 minute didactic session followed by an expert demonstration of the procedure that included error-based learning, whereas group A(2) (n = 10) was only given a demonstration of an iliac dilation and stent procedure. All trainees performed the intervention immediately following the expert demonstration. Twenty-seven endovascular physicians were recruited (>100 endovascular interventions). Performance was assessed using the quantitative (procedure and fluoroscopy time) and qualitative (stent/vessel ratio and residual stenosis) assessment parameters recorded by the simulator. RESULTS: The end-product (qualitative metrics) in the cognitive-skills group A(1) was similar to those of the endovascular physicians, though A(2) performed significantly worse than the physicians (group B): stent/vessel ratio (A(1) 0.89 vs B 0.96, P = .960; A(2) 0.66 vs B 0.96, P = .001) and residual stenosis (A(1) 11 vs B 4%, P = .511; A(2) 35 vs B 4%, P < .001). Group A(1) took longer to perform the procedure (A(1) 982 vs B 441 seconds, P < .001), with greater use of fluoroscopy than group B (A(1) 609 vs B 189 seconds, P < .001) whereas group A(2) performed the intervention as quickly as group B (A(2) 358 vs B 441 seconds, P = .192) but used less fluoroscopy (A(2) 120 vs 189 seconds, P = .002). CONCLUSION: Cognitive-skills training significantly improves the quality of end-product on a VR endovascular simulator, and is fundamental prior to assessment of inexperienced subjects.
目的:虚拟现实(VR)模拟已被建议用于客观评估血管内介入技能。本研究的目的是确定认知训练对无经验受试者在商用VR模拟器(VIST,血管介入模拟训练器,Mentice,瑞典哥德堡)上技术操作表现的影响。 方法:47名受试者对相同的虚拟髂动脉狭窄进行血管内治疗。没有血管内介入经验的外科实习生被分配到两种训练方案中:A(1)组(n = 10)接受45分钟的理论课程,随后由专家进行包括基于错误学习的手术演示,而A(2)组(n = 10)仅观看髂动脉扩张和支架置入手术的演示。所有实习生在专家演示后立即进行干预操作。招募了27名血管内介入医生(>100例血管内介入手术)。使用模拟器记录的定量(手术和透视时间)和定性(支架/血管比例和残余狭窄)评估参数来评估操作表现。 结果:认知技能组A(1)的最终结果(定性指标)与血管内介入医生相似,不过A(2)组的表现明显比医生(B组)差:支架/血管比例(A(1)0.89 vs B 0.96,P = 0.960;A(2)0.66 vs B 0.96,P = 0.001)和残余狭窄(A(1)11% vs B 4%,P = 0.511;A(2)35% vs B 4%,P < 0.001)。A(1)组完成手术耗时更长(A(1)982秒 vs B 441秒,P < 0.001),透视使用时间比B组更多(A(1)609秒 vs B 189秒,P < 0.001),而A(2)组进行干预操作的速度与B组一样快(A(2)358秒 vs B 441秒,P = 0.192),但透视使用时间更少(A(2)120秒 vs 189秒,P = 0.002)。 结论:认知技能训练显著提高了VR血管内模拟器上最终结果的质量,并且在评估无经验受试者之前至关重要。
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2007-5
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2006-6
J Vasc Surg. 2007-1
Med Sci (Basel). 2025-8-12
Perspect Med Educ. 2025-1-28
Adv Cogn Psychol. 2021-8-23
JMIR Med Educ. 2022-2-2
BMJ Open. 2021-5-26
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2018-1-11
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2015-10