Objective: To determine whether proficiency-based progression (PBP) training leads to better robotic surgical performance compared to traditional training (TT), given that the value of PBP training for learning robotic surgical skills is unclear. Materials and Methods: The PROVESA trial is a multicentric, prospective, randomized and blinded clinical study comparing PBP training with TT for robotic suturing and knot-tying anastomosis skills. A total of 36 robotic surgery-naïve junior residents were recruited from 16 training sites and 12 residency training programmes. Participants were randomly allocated to metric-based PBP training or the current standard of care TT, and compared at the end of training. The primary outcome was percentage of participants reaching the predefined proficiency benchmark. Secondary outcomes were the numbers of procedure steps and errors made. Results: Of the group that received TT, 3/18 reached the proficiency benchmark versus 12/18 of the PBP group (i.e. the PBP group were ~10 times as likely to demonstrate proficiency [P = 0.006]). The PBP group demonstrated a 51% reduction in number of performance errors from baseline to the final assessment (18.3 vs 8.9). The TT group demonstrated a marginal improvement (15.94 vs 15.44) in errors made. Conclusions: The PROVESA trial is the first prospective randomized controlled trial on basic skills training in robotic surgery. Implementation of a PBP training methodology resulted in superior surgical performance for robotic suturing and knot-tying anastomosis performance. Compared to TT, better surgical quality could be obtained by implementing PBP training for basic skills in robotic surgery.

Proficiency-based progression training for robotic surgery skills training: a randomized clinical trial / De Groote, R.; Puliatti, S.; Amato, M.; Mazzone, E.; Rosiello, G.; Farinha, R.; Paludo, A.; Desender, L.; Van Cleynenbreugel, B.; Bunting, B. P.; Mottrie, A.; Gallagher, A. G.; Larcher, A.; Uvin, P.; Decoene, J.; Tuyten, T.; D'Hondt, M.; Hubert, N.; Chatzopoulos, C.; De Troyer, B.. - In: BJU INTERNATIONAL. - ISSN 1464-4096. - 130:4(2022), pp. 528-535. [10.1111/bju.15811]

Proficiency-based progression training for robotic surgery skills training: a randomized clinical trial

Puliatti S.;
2022

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether proficiency-based progression (PBP) training leads to better robotic surgical performance compared to traditional training (TT), given that the value of PBP training for learning robotic surgical skills is unclear. Materials and Methods: The PROVESA trial is a multicentric, prospective, randomized and blinded clinical study comparing PBP training with TT for robotic suturing and knot-tying anastomosis skills. A total of 36 robotic surgery-naïve junior residents were recruited from 16 training sites and 12 residency training programmes. Participants were randomly allocated to metric-based PBP training or the current standard of care TT, and compared at the end of training. The primary outcome was percentage of participants reaching the predefined proficiency benchmark. Secondary outcomes were the numbers of procedure steps and errors made. Results: Of the group that received TT, 3/18 reached the proficiency benchmark versus 12/18 of the PBP group (i.e. the PBP group were ~10 times as likely to demonstrate proficiency [P = 0.006]). The PBP group demonstrated a 51% reduction in number of performance errors from baseline to the final assessment (18.3 vs 8.9). The TT group demonstrated a marginal improvement (15.94 vs 15.44) in errors made. Conclusions: The PROVESA trial is the first prospective randomized controlled trial on basic skills training in robotic surgery. Implementation of a PBP training methodology resulted in superior surgical performance for robotic suturing and knot-tying anastomosis performance. Compared to TT, better surgical quality could be obtained by implementing PBP training for basic skills in robotic surgery.
130
4
528
535
Proficiency-based progression training for robotic surgery skills training: a randomized clinical trial / De Groote, R.; Puliatti, S.; Amato, M.; Mazzone, E.; Rosiello, G.; Farinha, R.; Paludo, A.; Desender, L.; Van Cleynenbreugel, B.; Bunting, B. P.; Mottrie, A.; Gallagher, A. G.; Larcher, A.; Uvin, P.; Decoene, J.; Tuyten, T.; D'Hondt, M.; Hubert, N.; Chatzopoulos, C.; De Troyer, B.. - In: BJU INTERNATIONAL. - ISSN 1464-4096. - 130:4(2022), pp. 528-535. [10.1111/bju.15811]
De Groote, R.; Puliatti, S.; Amato, M.; Mazzone, E.; Rosiello, G.; Farinha, R.; Paludo, A.; Desender, L.; Van Cleynenbreugel, B.; Bunting, B. P.; Mottrie, A.; Gallagher, A. G.; Larcher, A.; Uvin, P.; Decoene, J.; Tuyten, T.; D'Hondt, M.; Hubert, N.; Chatzopoulos, C.; De Troyer, B.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

Licenza Creative Commons
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11380/1287014
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact