Cizmic Amila, Schwabe Nils, Häberle Frida, Killat David, Giannou Anastasios D, Preukschas Anas A, Nießen Anna, Pianka Frank, Billmann Franck, Mehrabi Arianeb, Müller-Stich Beat P, Hackert Thilo, Nickel Felix
Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Surg Endosc. 2025 May;39(5):3068-3078. doi: 10.1007/s00464-025-11673-w. Epub 2025 Mar 27.
Most minimally invasive surgery (MIS) training curricula involve practical training (PT) and cognitive learning (CL) to different extents. It has been proven that acquiring and training specific skills through CL can improve MIS skills. This study aimed to discover the most efficient combination of these two approaches and examine their effects on acquiring MIS skills in novices.
Sixty medical students without MIS experience participated in this randomized controlled study and were divided into three groups. The first group received the same amount of PT (50%) as CL (50%). The second group focused on PT (75%) compared to the CL (25%). The third group focused more on CL (75%), with less PT implemented (25%). Before and after training, participants performed an ex vivo laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCHE). Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) and Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) scores were used for MIS skill evaluation.
Group 1 improved all four performance assessments (global GOALS 14.3 vs. 18.0, p < 0.001, LCHE-specific GOALS 5.9 vs. 6.9, p = 0.016, global OSATS 19.4 vs. 26.4, p < 0.001, LCHE-specific OSATS 37.9 vs. 46.5, p = 0.004). Group 2 and Group 3 improved three of four performance scores (Group 2: global GOALS 15.0 vs. 18.4, p < 0.001, LCHE-specific GOALS 7.0 vs. 7.7, p = 0.115, global OSATS 19.6 vs. 25.8, p < 0.001, LCHE-specific OSATS 41.3 vs. 50.7, p = 0.001; Group 3: global GOALS 13.8 vs. 17.9, p < 0.001, LCHE-specific GOALS 5.8 vs. 6.6, p = 0.148, global OSATS 18.9 vs. 25.5, p < 0.001, LCHE-specific OSATS 36.8 vs. 43.5, p = 0.034).
A balanced combination of PT and CL seems to offer the most effective training compared to predominantly PT or CL training. All three training modes improved MIS skills in novices.
大多数微创手术(MIS)培训课程在不同程度上涉及实践培训(PT)和认知学习(CL)。已证明通过CL获取和训练特定技能可提高MIS技能。本研究旨在发现这两种方法的最有效组合,并检查它们对新手获取MIS技能的影响。
60名无MIS经验的医学生参与了这项随机对照研究,并被分为三组。第一组接受与CL(50%)相同数量的PT(50%)。第二组与CL(25%)相比更侧重于PT(75%)。第三组更侧重于CL(75%),实施的PT较少(25%)。在训练前后,参与者进行了离体腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LCHE)。使用客观结构化技术技能评估(OSATS)和腹腔镜技能整体手术评估(GOALS)分数进行MIS技能评估。
第1组在所有四项性能评估中均有改善(整体GOALS 14.3对18.0,p<0.001,LCHE特异性GOALS 5.9对6.9,p = 0.016,整体OSATS 19.4对26.4,p<0.001,LCHE特异性OSATS 37.9对46.5,p = 0.004)。第2组和第3组在四项性能分数中的三项有所改善(第2组:整体GOALS 15.0对18.4,p<0.001,LCHE特异性GOALS 7.0对7.7,p = 0.115,整体OSATS 19.6对25.8,p<0.001,LCHE特异性OSATS 41.3对50.7,p = 0.001;第3组:整体GOALS 13.8对17.9,p<0.001,LCHE特异性GOALS 5.8对6.6,p = 0.148,整体OSATS 18.9对25.5,p<0.001,LCHE特异性OSATS 36.8对43.5,p = 0.034)。
与主要是PT或CL训练相比,PT和CL的平衡组合似乎提供了最有效的训练。所有三种训练模式均提高了新手的MIS技能。