Impact of robotics and laparoscopy on surgical skills: A comparative study

被引:40
作者
Guru, Khurshid A.
Kuvshinoff, Boris W.
Pavlov-Shapiro, Sasha
Bienko, Marlene B.
Aftab, Mehr N.
Brady, William E.
Mohler, James L.
机构
[1] Roswell Pk Canc Inst, Dept Urol, Buffalo, NY 14263 USA
[2] Roswell Pk Canc Inst, Dept Gastrointestinal, Buffalo, NY 14263 USA
[3] Roswell Pk Canc Inst, Dept Nursing, Buffalo, NY 14263 USA
[4] Roswell Pk Canc Inst, Dept Biostat, Buffalo, NY 14263 USA
[5] Univ Buffalo, Sch Med & Biotechnol, Buffalo, NY USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.09.016
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
BACKGROUND: This study objectively surveyed and compared the ability of participants to perform laparoscopic and robotic tasks, and attempted to determine the key advantages of each modality STUDY DESIGN: A task-based training course was developed that included laparoscopic and robotic task modules. Twenty-two participants (6 faculty members, 6 fellows, and 10 residents) completed a pretask and postrask questionnaire concerning 3 tasks, using both laparoscopy trainer and the daVinci robotic system (Intuitive Surgical, Inc). All tasks were timed and values were recorded. The surveys were completed by each participant to assess both pre- and postrask experiences. RESULTS: In the pretask survey, 55% of subjects reported participating in more than 20 laparoscopic cases, and only 27% had ever worked at a robotic console. The median number of beads threaded in 5 minutes was similar for the 2 methods, but the median time to complete 5 beads was 98 seconds for the laparoscope compared with 160 seconds using the robot (p = 0.001). The median number of loops completed in 5 minutes was greater (p < 0.001) using the robot (7.5 versus 2). Only 9% of subjects completed 9 loops in 5 minutes using the laparoscope; 50% did so using the robot (p < 0.05). The percentage of subjects completing 3 knots in 5 minutes was similar when using the laparoscope (45%) and robot (68%). Familiarity and tactile feedback were the primary advantages with laparoscopy, and EndoWrist (Intuitive Surgical, Inc) and stereoscopic visualization were perceived as advantages of the robot. CONCLUSIONS: As with any new technology, skills must be mastered to use robotic technology for the most benefit. The EndoWrist action and stereoscopic visualization were the most valued advantages of the robot. Most fellows and residents would seek additional training in robotics if given the opportunity.
引用
收藏
页码:96 / 101
页数:6
相关论文
共 6 条
[1]   Robotic prostatectomy: Is it the future? [J].
Ahlering, TE .
UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2006, 24 (01) :1-3
[2]   Robotic surgery: identifying the learning curve through objective measurement of skill [J].
Chang, L ;
Satava, RM ;
Pellegrini, CA ;
Sinanan, MN .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2003, 17 (11) :1744-1748
[3]   Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: A technique of robotic radical prostatectomy: Experience in more than 1000 cases [J].
Menon, M ;
Hemal, AK .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2004, 18 (07) :611-619
[4]   Robotic surgery training and performance - Identifying objective variables for quantifying the extent of proficiency [J].
Narazaki, K ;
Oleynikov, D ;
Stergiou, N .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2006, 20 (01) :96-103
[5]  
Patel YR, 2003, AM SURGEON, V69, P599
[6]   Surgical robotics and laparoscopic training drills [J].
Sarle, R ;
Tewari, A ;
Shrivastava, A ;
Peabody, J ;
Menon, M .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2004, 18 (01) :63-66