Evaluation of a novel home-based laparoscopic and core surgical skills programme (Monash Online Surgical Training).

INTRODUCTION: Limitations to surgical education access were exacerbated during the COVID-19 Pandemic. In response, we created a national home-based comprehensive surgical skills course: Monash Online Surgical Training (MOST). Our aim was to evaluate the educational impact of this approach. METHODS: A remote, 6-week course was designed with learning objectives aligned to the national surgical training. Participants received a personal laparoscopic bench trainer, instrument tracking software, live webinars, access to an online theoretical learning platform, and individualised feedback by system-generated or expert surgeons' assessments. Mixed method analysis of instrument tracking metrics, pre- and post-course questionnaires (11 core surgical domains) and participant comments was utilised. Data were analysed using the Mann-Whitney U test, and a p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 54 participants with varied levels of experience (1 to > 6 years post-graduate level) completed MOST. All 11 learning-outcome domains demonstrated statistically significant improvement including core laparoscopic skills (1.4/5 vs 2.8/5, p < 0.0001) and handling laparoscopic instruments (1.5/5 vs 2.8/5, p < 0.0001). A total of 3460 tasks were completed reflecting 158.2 h (9492 min) of practice, 394 were submitted for formal feedback. Participants rated the course (mean 8.5/10, SD 1.6), live webinars (mean 8.9/10, SD 1.6) and instrument tracking software (mean 8.6, SD 1.7) highly. Qualitative analysis revealed a paradigm shift including the benefits of a safe learning environment and self-paced, self-directed learning. CONCLUSION: The MOST course demonstrates the successful implementation of a fully remote laparoscopic simulation course which participants found to be an effective tool to acquire core surgical skills.

Eye-tracking in surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is constantly evolving with the assistance of rapidly developing novel technology. Eye-tracking devices provide opportunities to monitor the acquisition of surgical skills, gain insight into performance, and enhance surgical practice. The aim of this review was to consolidate the available evidence for the use of eye-tracking in the surgical disciplines. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A search of OVID Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Scopus, and Science Direct was conducted January 2000 until December 2022. Studies involving eye-tracking in surgical training, assessment and technical innovation were included in the review. Non-surgical procedures, animal studies, and studies not involving surgical participants were excluded from the review. RESULTS: The search returned a total of 12 054 articles, 80 of which were included in the final analysis and review. Seventeen studies involved eye-tracking in surgical training, 48 surgical assessment, and 20 were focussing on technical aspects of this technology. Twenty-six different eye-tracking devices were used in the included studies. Metrics such as the number of fixations, duration of fixations, dwell time, and cognitive workload were able to differentiate between novice and expert performance. Eight studies demonstrated the effectiveness of gaze-training for improving surgical skill. CONCLUSION: The current literature shows a broad range of utility for a variety of eye-tracking devices in surgery. There remains a lack of standardization for metric parameters and gaze analysis techniques. Further research is required to validate its use to establish reliability and create uniform practices.

Laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair in infants: an initial experience.

BACKGROUND: Inguinal hernia repair is a common operation performed in children. In Australia, open repair (OR) continues to be the preferred method of treatment in infants, despite laparoscopic repair (LR) gaining popularity amongst some international centres. Our aim was to analyse initial outcomes with LR at our paediatric centre. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients <1 year of age who received LR or OR between January 2017 and July 2021 at our institution. Data were retrieved from both electronic and scanned medical records. Data were analysed using an unpaired t-test, Mann-Whitney test, Fisher's exact test or simple linear regression. A P-value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 376 patients were identified: LR was performed in 73 patients, and OR in 303 patients. Bilateral repair was more common amongst patients receiving LR: 56.2% versus 21.5%, P = 0.0001, treating either a symptomatic hernia or an intra-operative contralateral inguinal defect (70%). All LR patients received general anaesthetic, compared to 82.8% of patients in the OR group, P = 0.0001. There were no recurrences following LR and 3 with OR (P = 1.0). The metachronous contralateral inguinal hernia rate following OR was 10% (21/206). There was no significant difference in other complications, including wound infection, haematoma, testicular atrophy, and hydrocele formation. CONCLUSION: In our population OR was performed more often than LR. Operative complication rates were equivalent between OR and LR groups. However, infants that underwent OR were significantly more likely to develop a MCIH.