Evaluation of objective tools and artificial intelligence in robotic surgery technical skills assessment: a systematic review

Author:

Boal Matthew W E123ORCID,Anastasiou Dimitrios24,Tesfai Freweini12,Ghamrawi Walaa1,Mazomenos Evangelos24,Curtis Nathan5ORCID,Collins Justin W36,Sridhar Ashwin36,Kelly John36,Stoyanov Danail27ORCID,Francis Nader K138ORCID

Affiliation:

1. The Griffin Institute, Northwick Park & St Marks’ Hospital , London , UK

2. Wellcome/ESPRC Centre for Interventional Surgical Sciences (WEISS), University College London (UCL) , London , UK

3. Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Research Department of Targeted Intervention, UCL , London , UK

4. Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, UCL , London , UK

5. Department of General Surgey, Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust , Dorchester , UK

6. University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust , London , UK

7. Computer Science, UCL , London , UK

8. Yeovil District Hospital, Somerset Foundation NHS Trust , Yeovil, Somerset , UK

Abstract

Abstract Background There is a need to standardize training in robotic surgery, including objective assessment for accreditation. This systematic review aimed to identify objective tools for technical skills assessment, providing evaluation statuses to guide research and inform implementation into training curricula. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Ovid Embase/Medline, PubMed and Web of Science were searched. Inclusion criterion: robotic surgery technical skills tools. Exclusion criteria: non-technical, laparoscopy or open skills only. Manual tools and automated performance metrics (APMs) were analysed using Messick's concept of validity and the Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) Levels of Evidence and Recommendation (LoR). A bespoke tool analysed artificial intelligence (AI) studies. The Modified Downs–Black checklist was used to assess risk of bias. Results Two hundred and forty-seven studies were analysed, identifying: 8 global rating scales, 26 procedure-/task-specific tools, 3 main error-based methods, 10 simulators, 28 studies analysing APMs and 53 AI studies. Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills and the da Vinci Skills Simulator were the most evaluated tools at LoR 1 (OCEBM). Three procedure-specific tools, 3 error-based methods and 1 non-simulator APMs reached LoR 2. AI models estimated outcomes (skill or clinical), demonstrating superior accuracy rates in the laboratory with 60 per cent of methods reporting accuracies over 90 per cent, compared to real surgery ranging from 67 to 100 per cent. Conclusions Manual and automated assessment tools for robotic surgery are not well validated and require further evaluation before use in accreditation processes. PROSPERO: registration ID CRD42022304901

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Surgery

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