Bilateral Adrenal and testicular Tumours; When a Simple Diagnosis Becomes Complicated.

A 78-year-old man with a BMI 28.7, a moon face and a medical history of diabetes mellitus, hypothyroidism, undefined adrenal insufficiency and history of cardiac ablation, had been in urological follow up for both prostate and bladder cancer. PSA remained low after radiation and adjuvant ADT. Cystoscopy revealed no recurrence after transurethral resection of bladder tumour and instillation of BCG. A routine CT scan as indicated by EAU guideline, showed bilateral enlargement of the adrenal glands as the only abnormality de novo. Patient had no other symptoms than already long-existing fatigue. Considering patient's medical history, subsequently a FDG PET scan was performed which showed intense FDG uptake not only bilaterally in the adrenal glands, but also in both testes. An ultrasound of the testes demonstrated hypodense lesions with increased flow. US imaging raised the suspicion of testicular adrenal rest tumours. Differential diagnoses were primary testis tumour, metastatic disease, BCG-itis, lymphoma or rare endocrine disorders. The combination of bilateral adrenal gland hyperplasia and testicular masses reminded us of seeking the rare diagnosis of ectopic adrenal remnant in both testis and a Cushing-like feature. Endocrinological evaluation could not establish an all-encompassing diagnosis to explain all of the clinical findings. Bilateral orchidectomy was performed. Histological examination showed localization of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in both testes. Patient was referred to the haematologist and started with chemotherapy, R-CHOP. The diagnostic process in this case was challenging and misleading.

Development and validation of the TOCO-TURBT tool: a summative assessment tool that measures surgical competency in transurethral resection of bladder tumour.

BACKGROUND: The current shift towards competency-based residency training has increased the need for objective assessment of skills. In this study, we developed and validated an assessment tool that measures technical and non-technical competency in transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT). METHODS: The 'Test Objective Competency' (TOCO)-TURBT tool was designed by means of cognitive task analysis (CTA), which included expert consensus. The tool consists of 51 items, divided into 3 phases: preparatory (n = 15), procedural (n = 21), and completion (n = 15). For validation of the TOCO-TURBT tool, 2 TURBT procedures were performed and videotaped by 25 urologists and 51 residents in a simulated setting. The participants' degree of competence was assessed by a panel of eight independent expert urologists using the TOCO-TURBT tool. Each procedure was assessed by two raters. Feasibility, acceptability and content validity were evaluated by means of a quantitative cross-sectional survey. Regression analyses were performed to assess the strength of the relation between experience and test scores (construct validity). Reliability was analysed by generalizability theory. RESULTS: The majority of assessors and urologists indicated the TOCO-TURBT tool to be a valid assessment of competency and would support the implementation of the TOCO-TURBT assessment as a certification method for residents. Construct validity was clearly established for all outcome measures of the procedural phase (all r > 0.5, p < 0.01). Generalizability-theory analysis showed high reliability (coefficient Phi ≥ 0.8) when using the format of two assessors and two cases. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides first evidence that the TOCO-TURBT tool is a feasible, valid and reliable assessment tool for measuring competency in TURBT. The tool has the potential to be used for future certification of competencies for residents and urologists. The methodology of CTA might be valuable in the development of assessment tools in other areas of clinical practice.

The Simbla TURBT Simulator in Urological Residency Training: From Needs Analysis to Validation.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the value of the physical Simbla Transurethral Resection of a Bladder Tumor (TURBT) simulator as an educational tool within urological residency training, by means of a training needs analysis (TNA) and assessment of its feasibility, acceptability, and face, content, and construct validity. METHODS: To analyze the training needs for TURBT, procedural steps and pitfalls were identified and the TNA was completed during an expert consensus meeting. Participants (n = 76) were divided into three groups based on their experience in TURBT: novices, intermediates, and experts. Participants performed two standardized TURBT procedures on the simulator. Face validity and content validity, as well as feasibility and acceptability, were assessed with a quantitative survey. Construct validity was assessed by comparing the performance of novices, intermediates, and experts on resection time, quality of tumor resection, and overall performance. RESULTS: Of the 21 procedural steps and 17 pitfalls defined in TNA, 13 steps and 8 pitfalls were covered by the Simbla. Participants rated the Simbla's overall realism (face validity) with a score of 8 of 10 (range 6-9). The simulator was judged to be most useful (content validity) for learning eye-hand coordination: score 8 (6-10). All aspects regarding realism and usefulness were rated above the acceptability threshold of 6/10. Intermediates (100%) and experts (96%) considered the Simbla to be a useful educational tool within the urological curriculum. Resection time was longer for novices than for experts (p < 0.05; construct validity). In addition, the overall performance of novices was rated lower compared with intermediates and experts, and novices showed more irradical resections and bladder perforations (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The Simbla TURBT simulator is a valid, feasible, and acceptable educational tool for training procedural skills and may be implemented in the urological curriculum to complement learning in clinical practice. TNA is valuable in defining training objectives and evaluating the educational value of a simulator.

Evaluation of the educational value of a virtual reality TURP simulator according to a curriculum-based approach.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the place of the TURPsim (Simbionix/VirtaMed, Beit Goal, Israel) within a urologic residency training curriculum, including training needs analysis (TNA) and investigating its validity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Training needs analysis was conducted by an expert panel to identify procedural steps and pitfalls. Performance metrics of the simulator were compared with the TNA results. Participants were distributed according to their level of experience (completed transurethral resection of the prostate [TURP] procedures) as follows: novices (0), intermediates (1-50), and experts (>50). They followed standardized instructions and then performed 2 complete TURP procedures on the TURPsim. RESULTS: Ten of 22 procedural steps (TNA) and 4 of 11 pitfalls were covered by the TURPsim. A total of 66 participants, 22 in each group, were included. Median general judgment (face and content) about the TURPsim was rated 7.3 (median, 7; range, 3-9). Ninety-three percent of all participants qualified the TURPsim as a useful training model. Intermediates and experts had a significant faster resection time and less blood loss compared with novices (construct) (P = 0.001). Novices needed to re-resect previous lobes, and they also resected the prostate in the incorrect order more frequently compared with intermediates and experts. CONCLUSIONS: Training needs analysis is of paramount importance in the evaluation process of a training program. This curriculum-based approach including validity of a simulator seems valuable and may narrow the gap between skills laboratory and clinical practice. This study showed face, content, and construct validity of the TURPsim, and this simulator finds its place in the current urologic curriculum to train basic and procedural TURP skills.

Ergonomics in endourology and laparoscopy: an overview of musculoskeletal problems in urology.

PURPOSE: This study aims to provide an overview of type and frequency of musculoskeletal complaints among urologists. In addition, the urologists' knowledge about ergonomic conditions during minimally invasive urology was assessed, and they were asked how they would prefer to gain knowledge about this topic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online and hard copy version questionnaire was administered to urologists from different countries, mainly from Europe, performing endourology and laparoscopy. RESULTS: Of the 285 respondents, 245 (86.0%) urologists experienced musculoskeletal complaints in the past 12 months and 62.1% were considered to be work related. Most common areas for chronic complaints were neck, back, and shoulders. Almost 50% of the urologists experienced chronic musculoskeletal complaints, for which endourology (odds ratio [OR] 3.06; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.37-6.80) and laparoscopy (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.27-2.28) were significant risk factors. One third of the urologists considered their knowledge about ergonomics minimal, and 8% stated that they had no knowledge about these topics. Fifty percent of the respondents preferred to integrate information about ergonomic rules into hands-on training of urologic skills. CONCLUSION: High prevalence of experienced musculoskeletal complaints was found among urologists predominantly related to endourology and laparoscopy. Urologists indicate that they have a lack of knowledge about ergonomics in the operating room. Hence, we recommend integration of ergonomics in hands-on training programs early in the residency curriculum to gain knowledge and awareness and hopefully to offer possibilities to prevent these complaints in the future.

Results of the European Basic Laparoscopic Urological Skills examination.

BACKGROUND: In 2011, the European Basic Laparoscopic Urological Skills (E-BLUS) examination was introduced as a pilot for the examination of final-year urologic residents. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to answer the following research questions: What level of laparoscopic skills do final-year residents in urology have in Europe, and do the participants of the E-BLUS pass the examination according to the validated criteria? DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants of the examination were final-year urology residents from different European countries taking part in the European Urology Residents Education Program in 2011 and 2012. SURGICAL PROCEDURE: The E-BLUS exam consists of five tasks validated for the training of basic urologic laparoscopic skills. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Performances of the tasks were recorded on DVD and analysed by an objective rater. Time and number of errors made in tasks 1-4 were noted. Furthermore, all expert laparoscopic urologists were asked to score participants on a global rating scale (1-5) based on three items: depth perception, bimanual dexterity, and efficiency. Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire on prior training and laparoscopic experience. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Seventy DVD recordings were analysed. Most participants did not pass the time criteria on task 4 (90%), task 2 (85.7%), task 1 (74.3%), and task 5 (71.4%). Task 3 was passed by 84.3%. The overall quality score was passed by 64%. When combining time and quality, only three participants (4.2%) passed the examination according to the validated criteria. According to the questionnaire, 61% did not have the opportunity to train in laparoscopic skills. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the E-BLUS examination show that the level of basic laparoscopic skills among European residents is low. Although quality of performance is good, most residents do not pass the validated time criteria. Regular laparoscopic training or a dedicated fellowship should improve the laparoscopic level of residents in urology.

Assessment of basic laparoscopic skills on virtual reality simulator or box trainer.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated whether the peg transfer task is interchangeable between a VR simulator and a box trainer. Our research questions: (1) Are scores of the box trainer interchangeable with the virtual equivalent of the exercise; (2) does training on the box affect performance on the VR simulator and vice versa; and (3) which system is preferred? METHODS: Experienced laparoscopists and medical interns were randomly assigned to one of two groups (V or B). They performed eight repetitions of the peg transfer task (4 on each simulator system) following a crossover study design. Group B started on the box trainer and group V started on the VR simulator. Opinion of participants was evaluated by a questionnaire. RESULTS: A significant correlation was found between time to complete the task on the box and the VR simulator. The comparison of the performances per system showed that group B (N = 14) performed the peg transfer task on the VR simulator in significantly less time than group V (N = 14; p = 0.014). Overall, the box was preferred over the VR simulator. CONCLUSIONS: Although performances on the box trainer and VR simulator were correlated, they were not interchangeable. The results also imply that assessment on the VR simulator after pretraining on the box is acceptable, whereas VR simulator training alone might not suffice to pass an assessment on a box trainer. More research is needed to validate the use of the VR simulator as a FLS and PLUS assessment instrument.

Program for laparoscopic urological skills assessment: setting certification standards for residents.

AIM: There is growing pressure from the government and the public to define proficiency standards for surgical skills. Aim of this study was to estimate the reliability of the Program for Laparoscopic Urological Skills (PLUS) assessment and to set a certification standard for second-year urological residents. METHODS: Fifty participants were assessed on performance time and performance quality to investigate the reliability of the PLUS assessment. Generalisability coefficient of 0.8, on a scale of 0 to 1.0, was considered to indicate good reliability for assessment purposes. Pass/fail standards were based on laparoscopic experience: Novices, intermediates, and experts (>100 procedures). The pass/fail standards were investigated for the PLUS performances of 33 second-year urological residents. RESULTS: Fifteen novices, twenty-three intermediates and twelve experts were included. An inter-trial reliability of >0.80 was reached with two trials for each task. Inter-rater reliability of the quality measurements was 0.79 for two judges. Pass/fail scores were determined for the novice/intermediate boundary and the intermediate/expert boundary. Pass rates for second-year residents were 63.64% and 9.09%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The PLUS assessment is reliable for setting a certification standard for second-year urological residents that serves as a starting point for residents to proceed to the next level of laparoscopic competency.

Designing simulator-based training: an approach integrating cognitive task analysis and four-component instructional design.

Most studies of simulator-based surgical skills training have focused on the acquisition of psychomotor skills, but surgical procedures are complex tasks requiring both psychomotor and cognitive skills. As skills training is modelled on expert performance consisting partly of unconscious automatic processes that experts are not always able to explicate, simulator developers should collaborate with educational experts and physicians in developing efficient and effective training programmes. This article presents an approach to designing simulator-based skill training comprising cognitive task analysis integrated with instructional design according to the four-component/instructional design model. This theory-driven approach is illustrated by a description of how it was used in the development of simulator-based training for the nephrostomy procedure.

Program for laparoscopic urologic skills: a newly developed and validated educational program.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate a program for laparoscopic urologic skills (PLUS) to determine the face, content, and construct validation to achieve uniformity and standardization in training residents in urology. METHODS: The PLUS consists of 5 basic laparoscopic tasks. Three tasks were abstracted from the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery program, and 2 additional tasks were developed under continuous evaluation by expert urologists. Fifty participants were recruited from different hospitals and performed the final PLUS training. They all completed a questionnaire after performance. Three outcome parameters were measured: performance quality, time, and dropped objects. The relationship between laparoscopic experience and the outcome parameters was investigated. RESULTS: Of the 50 participants, 13 were students, 20 were residents, and 17 were urologists. Double-log linear regression analysis for all 5 tasks showed a significant effect (effect size range 0.53-0.82; P < .0005) for laparoscopic experience on performance time. Substantial correlations were found between experience and quality ratings (log-linear regression effect size 0.37; P = .012) and the number of dropped objects (Spearman correlation effect size 0.49; P < .01). The usefulness of the PLUS model as a training tool for basic laparoscopic skills was rated 4.55 on a scale from 1 (not useful) to 5 (useful) (standard deviation 0.58; range 3-5). CONCLUSION: The results of the present study indicated the face, content, and construct validity for the PLUS. The training is considered appropriate for use as a primary training tool for an entry test or as part of a step-wise training program in which basic and procedural laparoscopic skills are integrated.

A simulator for teaching transrectal ultrasound procedures: how useful and realistic is it?

INTRODUCTION: : We describe a new simulator for teaching transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and present the results of a preliminary evaluation of the simulator's realism and usefulness for training. METHODS: : A simulator for abdominal ultrasound was adjusted by the developer to enable simulation of TRUS by providing an opening for inserting a dummy rectal probe. To enable TRUS simulation, data from ultrasound prostate imaging of eight real patients obtained with our regular ultrasound machine were transferred to the simulator by connecting the computer of the simulator to the ultrasound machine. These data were used to create images in the TRUS simulator. Residents and urologists used the simulator to perform TRUS in one of the eight patient cases and judged the simulator's realism and usefulness. RESULTS: : We were able to construct an initial urological module for the TRUS simulator. The images shown on the monitor of the simulator are quite realistic. The simulator can be used without difficulty to collect data, to create cases, and to perform TRUS. The absence of an option for prostate biopsy and the lack of tissue resistance were mentioned as two important shortcomings. Forty-seven participants rated the simulator's overall realism and usefulness for training purposes as 3.8 (standard deviation: 0.7) and 4.0 (standard deviation: 0.8) on a five-point Likert scale, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: : The simulator we describe can be used as a training tool for TRUS. It enables training with different patient cases and minimizes the burden to patients. Simulation of prostate biopsies should be added to increase the model's usefulness.