...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of surgical education >Fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery (FLS) manual skills assessment: Surgeon vs nonsurgeon raters
【24h】

Fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery (FLS) manual skills assessment: Surgeon vs nonsurgeon raters

机译:腹腔镜手术(FLS)基本技能评估:外科医生与非外科医生评分者

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: The American Board of Surgery has recently started requiring completion of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery (FLS) program for board certification in general surgery. Although most SAGES Testing Centers utilize nonsurgeons as FLS proctors, the effectiveness of using nonsurgeons as FLS proctors has not been evaluated. Methods: Surgeons and nonsurgeons attending FLS proctor training workshops were studied. Participants reviewed training materials before course attendance. Subjects watched a videotaped FLS performance containing 9 "critical" errors, which participants were asked to identify. This assessment was repeated after hands-on training. Results: Thirteen surgeon and 17 nonsurgeon subjects participated. At baseline, surgeons detected 66% of errors, vs 65% for nonsurgeons, with no statistical difference between groups. Analysis of individual tasks also showed no difference between groups, except for intracorporeal knot-tying (p = 0.049). Both groups improved after training (p < 0.01), with surgeons detecting 81% of errors vs 83% for nonsurgeons (no difference in overall or task-specific ratings). Conclusions: This study suggests that trained nonsurgeons may be as effective as surgeon proctors in detecting errors associated with the FLS manual test. This finding supports the utility of using trained nonsurgeons as FLS proctors as surgical training programs face increasing economic constraints.
机译:目的:美国外科委员会最近开始要求完成美国胃肠道和内窥镜外科医师学会(SAGES)的腹腔镜手术(FLS)计划基础,以进行普通外科手术的董事会认证。尽管大多数SAGES测试中心都将非外科医生用作FLS监考人,但尚未评估使用非外科医生作为FLS监考人的有效性。方法:研究参加FLS督导员培训班的外科医生和非外科医生。参加者在参加课程之前检查了培训材料。受试者观看了包含9个“严重”错误的FLS录像带,要求参与者进行识别。在动手训练后重复进行该评估。结果:13位外科医生和17位非外科医生受试者参加了研究。在基线时,外科医生检测到66%的错误,而非外科医生则为65%,两组之间无统计学差异。对个体任务的分析也显示,除了体内打结以外,两组之间无差异(p = 0.049)。两组均在训练后有所改善(p <0.01),外科医生发现的错误率为81%,而非外科医生的为83%(总体或针对特定任务的评分没有差异)。结论:这项研究表明,受过训练的非外科医生在检测与FLS手动测试有关的错误方面可能与外科医生督导一样有效。这一发现支持了使用受过训练的非外科医生作为FLS督导者的效用,因为外科培训计划面临越来越多的经济限制。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号