Current status of validation for robotic surgery simulators a systematic review

BJU International

Volumn 111, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 194-205

  Abboudi, Hamid ^a   Khan, Mohammed S ^a   Aboumarzouk, Omar ^b   Guru, Khurshid A ^c   Challacombe, Ben ^a   Dasgupta, Prokar ^a   Ahmed, Kamran ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b ABERDEEN ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

^c ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

education; robotics; simulation; surgery; training; urology

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RELIABILITY; REVIEW; ROBOTIC SURGERY; ROBOTICS; SIMULATOR; SURGEON; SURGICAL TRAINING; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UROLOGY; VALIDITY; VIRTUAL REALITY;

CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, GRADUATE; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; GENERAL SURGERY; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; ROBOTICS; TEACHING; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; VALIDATION STUDIES AS TOPIC;

EID: 84873106872     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11270.x     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. Binder J, Kramer W,. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2001; 87: 408-410
2. Ahmed K, Khan MS, Vats A, et al. Current status of robotic assisted pelvic surgery and future developments. Int J Surg 2009; 7: 431-440
3. Zorn KC, Gofrit ON, Steinberg GD, Shalhav AL,. Evolution of robotic surgery in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2007; 8: 197-210
4. Maeso S, Reza M, Mayol JA, et al. Efficacy of the da Vinci surgical system in abdominal surgery compared with that of laparoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 2010; 252: 254-262
5. Torkington J, Smith SG, Rees BI, Darzi A,. Skill transfer from virtual reality to a real laparoscopic task. Surg Endosc 2001; 15: 1076-1079
6. Andreatta PB, Woodrum DT, Birkmeyer JD, et al. Laparoscopic skills are improved with LapMentor training: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg 2006; 243: 854-863
7. Sedlack RE, Kolars JC,. Computer simulator training enhances the competency of gastroenterology fellows at colonoscopy: results of a pilot study. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99: 33-37
8. Wass V, Van der Vleuten C, Shatzer J, Jones R., Assessment of clinical competence. Lancet 2001; 357: 945-949
9. Ahmed K, Miskovic D, Darzi A, Athanasiou T, Hanna GB,. Observational tools for assessment of procedural skills: a systematic review. Am J Surg 2011; 202: 469-480
10. Ahmed K, Ashrafian H, Hanna GB, Darzi A, Athanasiou T,. Assessment of specialists in cardiovascular practice. Nat Rev Cardiol 2009; 6: 659-667
11. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ 2009; 339: b2700
12. Seixas-Mikelus SA, Kesavadas T, Srimathveeravalli G, Chandrasekhar R, Wilding GE, Guru KA., Face validation of a novel robotic surgical simulator. Urology 2010; 76: 357-360
13. Seixas-Mikelus SA, Stegemann AP, Kesavadas T, et al. Content validation of a novel robotic surgical simulator. BJU Int 2011; 107: 1130-1135
14. ® Surgical System. J Urol 2009; 181 (Suppl.): 823
15. ® Surgical System. J Urol 2009; 181 (Suppl.): 823
16. Gavazzi A, Bahsoun AN, Van Haute W, et al. Face, content and construct validity of a virtual reality simulator for robotic surgery (SEP Robot). Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2011; 93: 146-150
17. van der Meijden OA, Broeders IA, Schijven MP., The SEP 'Robot': a valid virtual reality robotic simulator for the da vinci surgical system? Surg Technol Int 2010; 19: 51-58
18. McDonough P, Peterson A, Brand T., Initial validation of the ProMIS surgical simulator as an objective measure of robotic task performance. J Urol 2010; 183 (Suppl.): e515
19. Feifer A, Al-Ammari A, Kovac E, Delisle J, Carrier S, Anidjar M., Randomized controlled trial of virtual reality and hybrid simulation for robotic surgical training. BJU Int 2011; 108: 1652-1656
20. ® simulator-a construct validity study. J Endourol 2011; 25: 345-350
21. Lendvay TS, Casale P, Sweet R, Peters C,. VR robotic surgery: randomized blinded study of the dV-Trainer robotic simulator. Stud Health Technol Inform 2008; 132: 242-244
22. Sethi AS, Peine WJ, Mohammadi Y, Sundaram CP,. Validation of a novel virtual reality robotic simulator. J Endourol 2009; 23: 503-508
23. Kenney PA, Wszolek MF, Gould JJ, Libertino JA, Moinzadeh A,. Face, content, and construct validity of dV-trainer, a novel virtual reality simulator for robotic surgery. Urology 2009; 73: 1288-1292
24. Korets R, Graversen JA, Mues A, Gupta M, Landman J, Badani KK,. Face and construct validity assessment of 2nd generation robotic surgery simulator. J Urol 2011; 185 (Suppl.): e488
25. Korets R, Mues AC, Graversen J, Gupta M, Landman J, Badani KK,. Comparison of robotic surgery skill acquisition between DV-Trainer and da Vinci surgical system: a randomized controlled study. J Urol 2011; 185 (Suppl.): e593
26. Lerner MA, Ayalew M, Peine WJ, Sundaram CP,. Does training on a virtual reality robotic simulator improve performance on the da Vinci surgical system? J Endourol 2010; 24: 467-472
27. Hung AJ, Zehnder P, Patil MB, et al. Face, content and construct validity of a novel robotic surgery simulator. J Urol 2011; 186: 1019-1024
28. Fiedler MJ, Chen SJ, Judkins TN, Oleynikov D, Stergiou N,. Virtual reality for robotic laparoscopic surgical training. Stud Health Technol Inform 2007; 125: 127-129
29. Katsavelis D, Siu KC, Brown-Clerk B, et al. Validated robotic laparoscopic surgical training in a virtual-reality environment. Surg Endosc 2009; 23: 66-73
30. Ahmed K, Jawad M, Abboudi M, et al. Effectiveness of procedural simulation in urology: a systematic review. J Urol 2011; 186: 26-34
31. Davis JW, Kamat A, Munsell M, Pettaway C, Pisters L, Matin S,. Initial experience of teaching robot-assisted radical prostatectomy to surgeons-in-training: can training be evaluated and standardized? BJU Int 2010; 105: 1148-1154
32. van der Vleuten C., The assessment of professional competence: developments, research and practical implications. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 1996; 1: 41-67
33. Pellen MG, Horgan LF, Barton JR, Attwood SE,. Construct validity of the ProMIS laparoscopic simulator. Surg Endosc 2009; 23: 130-139
34. Neary PC, Boyle E, Delaney CP, Senagore AJ, Keane FB, Gallagher AG,. Construct validation of a novel hybrid virtual-reality simulator for training and assessing laparoscopic colectomy; results from the first course for experienced senior laparoscopic surgeons. Surg Endosc 2008; 22: 2301-2309
35. Schroeck FR, de Sousa CA, Kalman RA, et al. Trainees do not negatively impact the institutional learning curve for robotic prostatectomy as characterized by operative time, estimated blood loss, and positive surgical margin rate. Urology 2008; 71: 597-601
36. Moorthy K, Munz Y, Adams S, Pandey V, Darzi A,. A human factors analysis of technical and team skills among surgical trainees during procedural simulations in a simulated operating theatre. Ann Surg 2005; 242: 631-639
37. Moorthy K, Munz Y, Forrest D, et al. Surgical crisis management skills training and assessment: a simulation[corrected]-based approach to enhancing operating room performance. Ann Surg 2006; 244: 139-147
38. TM Hardware Features. 2010. Available at: http://www.simulatedsurgicals.com/hardware.html. Accessed January 2012
39. Healthcare CAE. Why train with the CAE ProMIS simulator? 2008. Available at: http://www.cae.com/en/healthcare/why.promis.simulator.asp. Accessed January 2012
40. ® System. 2011. Available at: http://www.mimic.ws/products/. Accessed January 2012
41. Intuitive Surgical. da Vinci skills simulator. 2012. Available at: http://www.intuitivesurgical.com/products/skills-simulator/. Accessed January 2012