Suppr超能文献

在腹腔镜胆囊切除术期间,外科医生评估其安全关键视野质量的准确性如何?

How Accurate Are Surgeons at Assessing the Quality of Their Critical View of Safety During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy?

作者信息

Athanasiadis Dimitrios I, Makhecha Keith, Blundell Nicholas, Mizota Tomoko, Anderson-Montoya Brittany, Fanelli Robert D, Scholz Stefan, Vazquez Richard, Gill Sujata, Stefanidis Dimitrios

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Indiana University Medical School, Indianapolis, Indiana.

出版信息

J Surg Res. 2025 Jan;305:36-40. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2024.10.048. Epub 2024 Dec 5.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Obtaining the critical view of safety (CVS) is considered an important step to reduce bile duct injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). However, existing literature suggests that few surgeons obtain adequate CVS when LC videos are directly evaluated by experts. This discrepancy calls for effective, standardized CVS teaching methods. While self-assessment (SA) remains the principal tool utilized by practicing surgeons for performance improvement, its effectiveness is controversial. The aim of this study was to compare surgeon SAs of repeated LC performance and attainment of the CVS with that of expert raters.

METHODS

Multi-institutional study of surgeon members from the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons who volunteered to participate. All surgeons were asked to submit an LC video and complete a SA of the CVS quality using the Strasberg scale (0-6 score with ≥5 score indicating appropriate CVS). The same videos were reviewed by two blinded expert raters, members of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons safe cholecystectomy task force, who had received prior rater training. Surgeon self-ratings and expert ratings were compared with a Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

RESULTS

Twenty-five surgeon-participants were recruited, 13 of whom submitted an LC video. Surgeons did not achieve adequate CVS in their first submitted video based on expert ratings. Surgeons in the SA group overestimated their performance across all four scales: Operative Performance Rating System (z = -0.36, P = 0.715), Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (z = -0.37, P = 0.712), Strasberg (z = -1.84, P = 0.066), and Competency Assessment Tool (z = -0.73, P = 0.465). Surgeons in the coaching group overestimated their performance on each scale as well: Operative Performance Rating System (z = -0.67, P = 0.500), Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (z = -1.48, P = 0.138), Strasberg (z = -1.07, P = 0.285), and Competency Assessment Tool (z = -1.21, P = 0.225).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirms that an adequate CVS is infrequently obtained during LC in a small but national sample of general surgeons. It further adds to the existing body of literature that suggests that SA alone may be inadequate for performance improvement. Effective teaching methods such as expert or artificial intelligence coaching are needed to improve the use of appropriate CVS by surgeons that may help decrease bile duct injury risk.

摘要

引言

获得安全关键视野(CVS)被认为是减少腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)期间胆管损伤的重要步骤。然而,现有文献表明,当专家直接评估LC视频时,很少有外科医生能获得足够的CVS。这种差异需要有效的、标准化的CVS教学方法。虽然自我评估(SA)仍然是执业外科医生用于提高绩效的主要工具,但其有效性存在争议。本研究的目的是比较外科医生对重复LC操作的自我评估以及CVS的达成情况与专家评分者的评估结果。

方法

对自愿参与的美国胃肠内镜外科医师协会的外科医生成员进行多机构研究。所有外科医生都被要求提交一段LC视频,并使用斯特拉斯伯格量表(0 - 6分,≥5分表示适当的CVS)完成对CVS质量的自我评估。相同的视频由两名不知情的专家评分者进行评审,他们是美国胃肠内镜外科医师协会安全胆囊切除术特别工作组的成员,之前接受过评分者培训。通过Wilcoxon符号秩检验比较外科医生的自我评分和专家评分。

结果

招募了25名外科医生参与者,其中13人提交了LC视频。根据专家评分,外科医生在首次提交的视频中未获得足够的CVS。自我评估组的外科医生在所有四个量表上都高估了自己 的表现:手术表现评分系统(z = -0.36,P = 0.715)、腹腔镜技能整体手术评估(z = -0.37,P = 0.712)、斯特拉斯伯格量表(z = -1.84,P = 0.066)和能力评估工具(z = -0.73,P = 0.465)。指导组的外科医生在每个量表上也高估了自己的表现:手术表现评分系统(z = -0.67,P = 0.500)、腹腔镜技能整体手术评估(z = -1.48,P = 0.138)、斯特拉斯伯格量表(z = -1.07,P = 0.285)和能力评估工具(z = -1.21,P = 0.225)。

结论

我们的研究证实,在一小部分但具有全国代表性的普通外科医生样本中,LC期间很少能获得足够的CVS。这进一步补充了现有文献,表明仅靠自我评估可能不足以提高绩效。需要有效的教学方法,如专家指导或人工智能指导,以提高外科医生对适当CVS的运用,这可能有助于降低胆管损伤风险。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验