Randomized controlled trial on the effect of coaching in simulated laparoscopic training
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 number of coaching sessions is 9-11.
“| Coaching process related | Number of sessions | 9–11 | [70,83] |”
From Coaching in undergraduate and graduate medical education: a scoping review of success factors, barriers, and outcomes (2026) · cites this paper as [70]
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
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- 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