Implementation and validation of a competency assessment tool for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Author:

Chevallay Mickael,Liot Emilie,Fournier Ian,Abbassi Ziad,Peloso Andrea,Hagen Monika E.,Mönig Stefan P.,Morel Philippe,Toso Christian,Buchs Nicolas,Miskovic Danilo,Ris Frederic,Jung Minoa K.ORCID

Abstract

Abstract Background Achieving proficiency in a surgical procedure is a milestone in the career of a trainee. We introduced a competency assessment tool for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in our residency program. Our aim was to assess the inter-rater reliability of this tool. Methods We included all laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed by residents under the supervision of board certified surgeons. All residents were assessed at the end of the procedure by the supervising surgeon (live reviewer) using our competency assessment tool. Video records of the same procedure were analyzed by two independent reviewers (reviewer A and B), who were blinded to the performing trainee’s. The assessment had three parts: a laparoscopic cholecystectomy-specific assessment tool (LCAT), the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) and a 5-item visual analogue scale (VAS) to address the surgeon’s autonomy in each part of the cholecystectomy. We compared the assessment scores of the live supervising surgeon and the video reviewers. Results We included 15 junior residents who performed 42 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Scoring results from live and video reviewer were comparable except for the OSATS and VAS part. The score for OSATS by the live reviewer and reviewer B were 3.68 vs. 4.26 respectively (p = 0.04) and for VAS (5.17 vs. 4.63 respectively (p = 0.03). The same difference was found between reviewers A and B with OSATS score (3.75 vs. 4.26 respectively (p = 0.001)) and VAS (5.56 vs. 4.63 respectively; p = 0.004)). Conclusion Our competency assessment tool for the evaluation of surgical skills specific to laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been shown to be objective and comparable in-between raters during live procedure or on video material.

Funder

University of Geneva

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Surgery

Reference19 articles.

1. The Amercian Board of Surgery. Booklet of information-surgery 2019–2020. American Board of Surgery, Philadelphia. http://www.absurgery.org/xfer/BookletofInfo-Surgery.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2019

2. Joint Committee on Surgical Training. Certification Guidelines and Checklists 2017. https://www.jcst.org/quality-assurance/certification-guidelines-and-checklists/. Accessed 10 May 2019

3. Nasca TJ, Day SH, Amis ES Jr, Force ADHT (2010) The new recommendations on duty hours from the ACGME task force. N Engl J Med 363:e3

4. Mackenzie H, Ni M, Miskovic D, Motson RW, Gudgeon M, Khan Z, Longman R, Coleman MG, Hanna GB (2015) Clinical validity of consultant technical skills assessment in the English national training programme for laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 102:991–997

5. Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 15:155–163

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3