Cited by 69Surgical Simulation and TrainingInnovations in Medical EducationSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare

Randomized controlled trial on the effect of coaching in simulated laparoscopic training

Cole, Simon J., Mackenzie, Hugh, Ha, Joon, Hanna, George B., Miskovic, Danilo·2014·Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract

Background The effect of coaching on surgical quality and understanding in simulated training remains unknown. The aim of this study was compare the effects of structured coaching and autodidactic training in simulated laparoscopic surgery.Methods Seventeen surgically naive medical students were randomized into two groups: eight were placed into an intervention group and received structured coaching, and nine were placed into a control group and received no training. They each performed 10 laparoscopic cholecystectomies on a virtual reality simulator. The surgical quality of the first, fifth, and 10th operations was evaluated by 2 independent blinded assessors using the Competency Assessment Tool (CAT) for cholecystectomy. Understanding of operative strategy was tested before the first, fifth, and 10th operation. Performance metrics, path length, total number of movements, operating time, and error frequency were evaluated. The groups were compared by the Mann-Whitney U test. Proficiency gain curves were plotted using curve fit and CUSUM models; change point analysis was performed by multiple Wilcoxon signed rank analyses.Results The intervention group scored significantly higher on the CAT assessment of procedures 1, 5, and 10, with increasing disparity. They also performed better in the knowledge test at procedures 5 and 10, again with an increasing difference. The learning curve for error frequency of the intervention group reached competency after operation 7, whereas the control group did not plateau by procedure 10. The learning curves of both groups for path length and number movements were almost identical; the mean operation time was shorter for the control group.Conclusions Clinically relevant markers of proficiency including error reduction, understanding of surgical strategy, and surgical quality are significantly improved with structured coaching. Path length and number of movements representing merely manual skills are developed with task repetition rather than influenced by coaching. Structured coaching may represent a key component in the acquisition of procedural skills.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00464-013-3265-0

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 24 · Cited by 69

Authors
Cole, S. J., Mackenzie, H., Ha, J., Hanna, G. B., & Miskovic, D.
Affiliations
Imperial College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Mackenzie, Hugh
Venue
Surgical Endoscopy
Published
2013-11-07
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
979-986
ISSN
  • 0930-2794 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-2218
OpenAlex
W2088440298
Cited by
69
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4
FWCI
4.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Surgical Endoscopy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical Simulation and Training
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Keywords
laparoscopic surgery training, virtual reality surgical simulator, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, surgical skill acquisition, learning curve, competency assessment, surgical errors, medical students
MeSH terms
Clinical Competence, Computer Simulation, Education, Medical, Continuing, Faculty, Medical, Female, Humans, Male, Reproducibility of Results, Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic, Young Adult, Learning Curve

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review