Preparing for the American Board of Surgery Flexible Endoscopy Curriculum: Development of multi-institutional proficiency-based training standards and pilot testing of a simulation-based mastery learning curriculum for the Endoscopy Training System.

BACKGROUND: The Fundamentals of Endoscopic Surgery (FES) exam is required for American Board of Surgery certification. The purpose of this study was to develop performance standards for a simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) curriculum for the FES performance exam using the Endoscopy Training System (ETS). METHODS: Experienced endoscopists from multiple institutions and specialties performed each ETS task (scope manipulation (SM), tool targeting (TT), retroflexion (RF), loop management (LM), and mucosal inspection (MI)) with scores used to develop performance standards for a SBML training curriculum. Trainees completed the curriculum to determine feasibility, and effect on FES performance. RESULTS: Task specific training standards were determined (SM-121sec, TT-243sec, RF-159sec, LM-261sec, MI-180-480sec, 7 polyps). Trainees required 29.5 ± 3.7 training trials over 2.75 ± 0.5 training sessions to complete the SBML curriculum. Despite high baseline FES performance, scores improved (pre 73.4 ± 7, post 78.1 ± 5.2; effect size = 0.76, p > 0.1), but this was not statistically discernable. CONCLUSIONS: This SBML curriculum was feasible and improved FES scores in a group of high performers. This curriculum should be applied to novice endoscopists to determine effectiveness for FES exam preparation.

Cost Comparison of Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery Training Completed With Standard Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery Equipment versus Low-Cost Equipment.

OBJECTIVE: Training for the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) skills test can be expensive. Previous work demonstrated that training on an ergonomically different, low-cost platform does not affect FLS skills test outcomes. This study compares the average training cost with standard FLS equipment and medical-grade consumables versus training on a lower cost platform with non-medical-grade consumables. DESIGN: Subjects were prospectively randomized to either the standard FLS training platform (n = 19) with medical-grade consumables (S-FLS), or the low-cost platform (n = 20) with training-grade products (LC-FLS). Both groups trained to proficiency using previously established mastery learning standards on the 5 FLS tasks. The fixed and consumable cost differences were compared. SETTING: Training occurred in a surgical simulation center. PARTICIPANTS: Laparoscopic novice medical student and resident physician health care professionals who had not completed the national FLS proficiency curriculum and who had performed less than 10 laparoscopic cases. RESULTS: The fixed cost of the platform was considerably higher in the S-FLS group (S-FLS, $3360; LC-FLS, $879), and the average consumable training cost was significantly higher for the S-FLS group (S-FLS, $1384.52; LC-FLS, $153.79; p < 0.001). The LC-FLS group had a statistically discernable cost reduction for each consumable (Gauze $9.24 vs. $0.39, p = 0.002; EndoLoop $540.00 vs. $40.60, p < 0.001; extracorporeal suture $216.45 vs. $25.20, p < 0.001; intracorporeal suture $618.83 vs. $87.60, p < 0.001). The annual fixed and consumable cost to train 5 residents is $10,282.60 in the S-FLS group versus $1647.95 in the LC-FLS group. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the average cost to train a single trainee to proficiency using a lower fixed-cost platform and non-medical-grade equipment results in significant financial savings. A 5-resident program will save approximately $8500 annually. Residency programs should consider adopting this strategy to reduce the cost of FLS training.

Outcomes of Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) mastery training standards applied to an ergonomically different, lower cost platform.

OBJECTIVE: Using previously established mastery learning standards, this study compares outcomes of training on standard FLS (FLS) equipment with training on an ergonomically different (ED-FLS), but more portable, lower cost platform. METHODS: Subjects completed a pre-training FLS skills test on the standard platform and were then randomized to train on the FLS training platform (n = 20) or the ED-FLS platform (n = 19). A post-training FLS skills test was administered to both groups on the standard FLS platform. RESULTS: Group performance on the pretest was similar. Fifty percent of FLS and 32 % of ED-FLS subjects completed the entire curriculum. 100 % of subjects completing the curriculum achieved passing scores on the post-training test. There was no statistically discernible difference in scores on the final FLS exam (FLS 93.4, ED-FLS 93.3, p = 0.98) or training sessions required to complete the curriculum (FLS 7.4, ED-FLS 9.8, p = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: These results show that when applying mastery learning theory to an ergonomically different platform, skill transfer occurs at a high level and prepares subjects to pass the standard FLS skills test.

Conducting Elite Performance Training.

Training to excellence in the conduct of surgical procedures has many similarities to the acquisition and mastery of technical skills in elite-level music and sports. By using coaching techniques and strategies gleaned from analysis of professional music ensembles and athletic training, surgical educators can set conditions that increase the success rate of training to elite performance. This article describes techniques and strategies used in both music and athletic coaching, and it discusses how they can be applied and integrated into surgical simulation and education.