4.6 Article

The effect of observing novice and expert performance on acquisition of surgical skills on a robotic platform

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 12, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188233

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Intuitive Surgical grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Observational learning plays an important role in surgical skills training, following the traditional model of learning from expertise. Recent findings have, however, highlighted the benefit of observing not only expert performance but also error-strewn performance. The aim of this study was to determine which model (novice vs. expert) would lead to the greatest benefits when learning robotically assisted surgical skills. Methods 120 medical students with no prior experience of robotically-assisted surgery completed a ring-carrying training task on three occasions; baseline, post-intervention and at one-week follow-up. The observation intervention consisted of a video model performing the ring-carrying task, with participants randomly assigned to view an expert model, a novice model, a mixed expert/novice model or no observation (control group). Participants were assessed for task performance and surgical instrument control. Results There were significant group differences post-intervention, with expert and novice observation groups outperforming the control group, but there were no clear group differences at a retention test one week later. There was no difference in performance between the expertobserving and error-observing groups. Conclusions Similar benefits were found when observing the traditional expert model or the error-strewn model, suggesting that viewing poor performance may be as beneficial as viewing expertise in the early acquisition of robotic surgical skills. Further work is required to understand, then inform, the optimal curriculum design when utilising observational learning in surgical training.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available