Brocke Tiffany K, Fox Cory, Clanahan Julie M, Klos Coen L, Chapman William C, Wise Paul E, Awad Michael M, Ohman Kerri A
Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
J Surg Educ. 2024 Nov;81(11):1577-1584. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.07.021. Epub 2024 Sep 9.
To collect validity evidence for the use of the Anastomosis Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (A-OSATS) instrument, which has been developed to evaluate performance of a minimally invasive side-to-side bowel anastomosis with hand-sewn common enterotomy.
Residents performed a robotic ileocolic anastomosis simulation on an ex vivo porcine model. Faculty scored each resident with the A-OSATS and performed a provocative leak test on the completed anastomoses. Residents were reassessed on the sewing sub-score 1 month later. Data were compared with parametric and nonparametric analysis.
Single academic general surgery residency PARTICIPANTS: PGY-4 and -5 general surgery residents (n = 17) RESULTS: PGY-5s performed better than PGY-4s in repeat A-OSATS sewing sub-score (mean 55/55 ± 0 vs 43 ± 4.9, p < 0.001) and time to complete (minutes, mean 14.5 ± 4.9 vs 21.2 ± 3.9, p = 0.01). There was a strong correlation between A-OSATS score and time (r = -0.67, p = 0.005). For the initial assessment, there was no significant difference in mean A-OSATS score between anastomoses that leaked and those that did not leak (137.3 ± 14.5 vs 150.1 ± 11.2, p = 0.098), but on repeat assessment, intact anastomoses had a higher mean A-OSATS sewing sub-score than those that leaked (52.2 ± 4.7 vs 39 ± 3.5, p = 0.007). There was no significant difference between initial A-OSATS score and repeat score (p = 0.14).
We provide extrapolative validity evidence for the A-OSATS instrument by comparing A-OSATS score to time to sew, provocative leak test, and discrimination between PGY-4s and PGY-5s. Generalizability validity evidence is provided by test-retest reliability. Further refinement is needed for the A-OSATS tool to be used for high-stakes entrustment decisions in resident-performed robotic ileocolic anastomoses.
收集吻合术客观结构化技术技能评估(A-OSATS)工具使用的效度证据,该工具旨在评估采用手工缝合普通肠切开术进行的微创侧侧肠吻合术的操作表现。
住院医师在离体猪模型上进行机器人回结肠吻合术模拟。教员使用A-OSATS对每位住院医师进行评分,并对完成的吻合术进行激发性漏液试验。1个月后对住院医师的缝合子评分进行重新评估。数据采用参数分析和非参数分析进行比较。
单一学术性普通外科住院医师培训项目
4年级和5年级普通外科住院医师(n = 17)
在重复A-OSATS缝合子评分(平均55/55 ± 0对43 ± 4.9,p < 0.001)和完成时间(分钟,平均14.5 ± 4.9对21.2 ± 3.9,p = 0.01)方面。5年级住院医师的表现优于4年级住院医师。A-OSATS评分与时间之间存在很强的相关性(r = -0.67,p = 0.005)。对于初始评估,发生漏液的吻合术和未发生漏液的吻合术之间的平均A-OSATS评分无显著差异(137.3 ± 14.5对150.1 ± 11.2,p = 0.098),但在重新评估时,完整无损的吻合术的平均A-OSATS缝合子评分高于发生漏液的吻合术(52.2 ± 4.7对39 ± 3.5,p = 0.007)。初始A-OSATS评分与重新评分之间无显著差异(p = 0.14)。
我们通过将A-OSATS评分与缝合时间、激发性漏液试验以及4年级和5年级住院医师之间的区分度进行比较,为A-OSATS工具提供了外推效度证据。重测信度提供了可推广性效度证据。若要将A-OSATS工具用于住院医师进行的机器人回结肠吻合术的高风险委托决策,还需要进一步完善。