State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery

A systematic review

Benjamin Zendejas, Ryan Brydges, Stanley J. Hamstra, David Allan Cook

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

139 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Summarize the outcomes and best practices of simulation training for laparoscopic surgery. BACKGROUND: Simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery has become a mainstay of surgical training. Much new evidence has accrued since previous reviews were published. METHODS: We systematically searched the literature through May 2011 for studies evaluating simulation, in comparison with no intervention or an alternate training activity, for training health professionals in laparoscopic surgery. Outcomes were classified as satisfaction, skills (in a test setting) of time (to perform the task), process (eg, performance rating), product (eg, knot strength), and behaviors when caring for patients. We used random effects to pool effect sizes. RESULTS: From 10,903 articles screened, we identified 219 eligible studies enrolling 7138 trainees, including 91 (42%) randomized trials. For comparisons with no intervention (n = 151 studies), pooled effect size (ES) favored simulation for outcomes of knowledge (1.18; N = 9 studies), skills time (1.13; N = 89), skills process (1.23; N = 114), skills product (1.09; N = 7), behavior time (1.15; N = 7), behavior process (1.22; N = 15), and patient effects (1.28; N = 1), all P < 0.05. When compared with nonsimulation instruction (n = 3 studies), results significantly favored simulation for outcomes of skills time (ES, 0.75) and skills process (ES, 0.54). Comparisons between different simulation interventions (n = 79 studies) clarified best practices. For example, in comparison with virtual reality, box trainers have similar effects for process skills outcomes and seem to be superior for outcomes of satisfaction and skills time. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation-based laparoscopic surgery training of health professionals has large benefits when compared with no intervention and is moderately more effective than nonsimulation instruction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)586-593
Number of pages8
JournalAnnals of Surgery
Volume257
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2013

Fingerprint

Laparoscopy
Practice Guidelines
Health
Teaching
Simulation Training

Keywords

  • instructional design
  • laparoscopy
  • medical education
  • simulation
  • surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery : A systematic review. / Zendejas, Benjamin; Brydges, Ryan; Hamstra, Stanley J.; Cook, David Allan.

In: Annals of Surgery, Vol. 257, No. 4, 04.2013, p. 586-593.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Zendejas, Benjamin ; Brydges, Ryan ; Hamstra, Stanley J. ; Cook, David Allan. / State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery : A systematic review. In: Annals of Surgery. 2013 ; Vol. 257, No. 4. pp. 586-593.
@article{7b2eb8300f0243ff90281751c4d53be8,
title = "State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery: A systematic review",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Summarize the outcomes and best practices of simulation training for laparoscopic surgery. BACKGROUND: Simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery has become a mainstay of surgical training. Much new evidence has accrued since previous reviews were published. METHODS: We systematically searched the literature through May 2011 for studies evaluating simulation, in comparison with no intervention or an alternate training activity, for training health professionals in laparoscopic surgery. Outcomes were classified as satisfaction, skills (in a test setting) of time (to perform the task), process (eg, performance rating), product (eg, knot strength), and behaviors when caring for patients. We used random effects to pool effect sizes. RESULTS: From 10,903 articles screened, we identified 219 eligible studies enrolling 7138 trainees, including 91 (42{\%}) randomized trials. For comparisons with no intervention (n = 151 studies), pooled effect size (ES) favored simulation for outcomes of knowledge (1.18; N = 9 studies), skills time (1.13; N = 89), skills process (1.23; N = 114), skills product (1.09; N = 7), behavior time (1.15; N = 7), behavior process (1.22; N = 15), and patient effects (1.28; N = 1), all P < 0.05. When compared with nonsimulation instruction (n = 3 studies), results significantly favored simulation for outcomes of skills time (ES, 0.75) and skills process (ES, 0.54). Comparisons between different simulation interventions (n = 79 studies) clarified best practices. For example, in comparison with virtual reality, box trainers have similar effects for process skills outcomes and seem to be superior for outcomes of satisfaction and skills time. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation-based laparoscopic surgery training of health professionals has large benefits when compared with no intervention and is moderately more effective than nonsimulation instruction.",
keywords = "instructional design, laparoscopy, medical education, simulation, surgery",
author = "Benjamin Zendejas and Ryan Brydges and Hamstra, {Stanley J.} and Cook, {David Allan}",
year = "2013",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1097/SLA.0b013e318288c40b",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "257",
pages = "586--593",
journal = "Annals of Surgery",
issn = "0003-4932",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery

T2 - A systematic review

AU - Zendejas, Benjamin

AU - Brydges, Ryan

AU - Hamstra, Stanley J.

AU - Cook, David Allan

PY - 2013/4

Y1 - 2013/4

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Summarize the outcomes and best practices of simulation training for laparoscopic surgery. BACKGROUND: Simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery has become a mainstay of surgical training. Much new evidence has accrued since previous reviews were published. METHODS: We systematically searched the literature through May 2011 for studies evaluating simulation, in comparison with no intervention or an alternate training activity, for training health professionals in laparoscopic surgery. Outcomes were classified as satisfaction, skills (in a test setting) of time (to perform the task), process (eg, performance rating), product (eg, knot strength), and behaviors when caring for patients. We used random effects to pool effect sizes. RESULTS: From 10,903 articles screened, we identified 219 eligible studies enrolling 7138 trainees, including 91 (42%) randomized trials. For comparisons with no intervention (n = 151 studies), pooled effect size (ES) favored simulation for outcomes of knowledge (1.18; N = 9 studies), skills time (1.13; N = 89), skills process (1.23; N = 114), skills product (1.09; N = 7), behavior time (1.15; N = 7), behavior process (1.22; N = 15), and patient effects (1.28; N = 1), all P < 0.05. When compared with nonsimulation instruction (n = 3 studies), results significantly favored simulation for outcomes of skills time (ES, 0.75) and skills process (ES, 0.54). Comparisons between different simulation interventions (n = 79 studies) clarified best practices. For example, in comparison with virtual reality, box trainers have similar effects for process skills outcomes and seem to be superior for outcomes of satisfaction and skills time. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation-based laparoscopic surgery training of health professionals has large benefits when compared with no intervention and is moderately more effective than nonsimulation instruction.

AB - OBJECTIVE: Summarize the outcomes and best practices of simulation training for laparoscopic surgery. BACKGROUND: Simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery has become a mainstay of surgical training. Much new evidence has accrued since previous reviews were published. METHODS: We systematically searched the literature through May 2011 for studies evaluating simulation, in comparison with no intervention or an alternate training activity, for training health professionals in laparoscopic surgery. Outcomes were classified as satisfaction, skills (in a test setting) of time (to perform the task), process (eg, performance rating), product (eg, knot strength), and behaviors when caring for patients. We used random effects to pool effect sizes. RESULTS: From 10,903 articles screened, we identified 219 eligible studies enrolling 7138 trainees, including 91 (42%) randomized trials. For comparisons with no intervention (n = 151 studies), pooled effect size (ES) favored simulation for outcomes of knowledge (1.18; N = 9 studies), skills time (1.13; N = 89), skills process (1.23; N = 114), skills product (1.09; N = 7), behavior time (1.15; N = 7), behavior process (1.22; N = 15), and patient effects (1.28; N = 1), all P < 0.05. When compared with nonsimulation instruction (n = 3 studies), results significantly favored simulation for outcomes of skills time (ES, 0.75) and skills process (ES, 0.54). Comparisons between different simulation interventions (n = 79 studies) clarified best practices. For example, in comparison with virtual reality, box trainers have similar effects for process skills outcomes and seem to be superior for outcomes of satisfaction and skills time. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation-based laparoscopic surgery training of health professionals has large benefits when compared with no intervention and is moderately more effective than nonsimulation instruction.

KW - instructional design

KW - laparoscopy

KW - medical education

KW - simulation

KW - surgery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84875231007&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84875231007&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318288c40b

DO - 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318288c40b

M3 - Article

VL - 257

SP - 586

EP - 593

JO - Annals of Surgery

JF - Annals of Surgery

SN - 0003-4932

IS - 4

ER -