Våpenstad Cecilie, Hofstad Erlend Fagertun, Bø Lars Eirik, Kuhry Esther, Johnsen Gjermund, Mårvik Ronald, Langø Thomas, Hernes Toril Nagelhus
a Faculty of Medicine , Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) , Trondheim , Norway.
b Department of Medical Technology , SINTEF Technology and Society , Trondheim , Norway.
Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2017 Dec;26(6):346-354. doi: 10.1080/13645706.2017.1319866. Epub 2017 May 9.
Virtual reality (VR) simulators enrich surgical training and offer training possibilities outside of the operating room (OR). In this study, we created a criterion-based training program on a VR simulator with haptic feedback and tested it by comparing the performances of a simulator group against a control group.
Medical students with no experience in laparoscopy were randomly assigned to a simulator group or a control group. In the simulator group, the candidates trained until they reached predefined criteria on the LapSim VR simulator (Surgical Science AB, Göteborg, Sweden) with haptic feedback (Xitact IHP, Mentice AB, Göteborg, Sweden). All candidates performed a cholecystectomy on a porcine organ model in a box trainer (the clinical setting). The performances were video rated by two surgeons blinded to subject training status.
In total, 30 students performed the cholecystectomy and had their videos rated (N = 16 simulator group, N = 14 control group). The control group achieved better video rating scores than the simulator group (p < .05).
The criterion-based training program did not transfer skills to the clinical setting. Poor mechanical performance of the simulated haptic feedback is believed to have resulted in a negative training effect.
虚拟现实(VR)模拟器丰富了外科手术训练,并提供了手术室(OR)之外的训练可能性。在本研究中,我们在具有触觉反馈的VR模拟器上创建了一个基于标准的训练程序,并通过比较模拟器组与对照组的表现对其进行了测试。
将没有腹腔镜手术经验的医学生随机分配到模拟器组或对照组。在模拟器组中,候选人使用带有触觉反馈的LapSim VR模拟器(瑞典哥德堡的Surgical Science AB公司)进行训练,直到达到预先设定的标准(瑞典哥德堡的Mentice AB公司的Xitact IHP)。所有候选人在箱式训练器中的猪器官模型上进行胆囊切除术(临床场景)。由两名对受试者训练状态不知情的外科医生对表现进行视频评分。
共有30名学生进行了胆囊切除术并对他们的视频进行了评分(模拟器组N = 16,对照组N = 14)。对照组的视频评分高于模拟器组(p < 0.05)。
基于标准的训练程序未能将技能转移到临床场景。模拟触觉反馈的机械性能不佳被认为导致了负面的训练效果。