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.

[1]  Elspeth M McDougall,et al.  Validation of surgical simulators. , 2007, Journal of endourology.

[2]  A. Scherpbier,et al.  Validation and implementation of surgical simulators: a critical review of present, past, and future , 2009, Surgical Endoscopy.

[3]  M. Desai,et al.  Face and content validity of transurethral resection of prostate on Uro Trainer: is the simulation training useful? , 2010, Journal of endourology.

[4]  Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer,et al.  Training Complex Cognitive Skills: A Four-Component Instructional Design Model for Technical Training , 1997 .

[5]  J. Svanvik,et al.  Construct validity of a full procedure, virtual reality, real-time, simulation model for training in transurethral resection of the prostate. , 2010, Journal of endourology.

[6]  A. Gross,et al.  "Homemade" TUR-simulator for less than $40 U.S.? The "Tupper" experience. , 2009, Journal of endourology.

[7]  David F. Feldon,et al.  Cognitive task analysis , 2009 .

[8]  R. Miano,et al.  Treatment options for benign prostatic hyperplasia in older men. , 2008, Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research.

[9]  J. Sweller,et al.  Cognitive load theory in health professional education: design principles and strategies , 2010, Medical education.

[10]  Michael Molenda,et al.  In Search of the Elusive ADDIE Model , 2003 .

[11]  Timothy M. Kowalewski,et al.  The virtual reality transurethral prostatic resection trainer: evaluation of discriminate validity. , 2007, The Journal of urology.

[12]  H. Bruschini,et al.  Is The Ability to Perform Transurethral Resection of the Prostate Influenced by the Surgeon’s Previous Experience? , 2008, Clinics.

[13]  Daniel J Scott,et al.  Patient Safety, Competency, and the Future of Surgical Simulation , 2006, Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare.

[14]  Erlend Fagertun Hofstad,et al.  Perceiving haptic feedback in virtual reality simulators , 2013, Surgical Endoscopy.

[15]  John J. van den Dobbelsteen,et al.  Force feedback and basic laparoscopic skills , 2008, Surgical Endoscopy.

[16]  B. Kelly,et al.  The effects of the European Working Time Directive on surgical training: the basic surgical trainee’s perspective , 2011, Irish Journal of Medical Science.

[17]  Frances Lawrenz,et al.  A unified approach to validation, reliability, and education study design for surgical technical skills training. , 2010, Archives of surgery.

[18]  S. Hudak,et al.  External validation of a virtual reality transurethral resection of the prostate simulator. , 2010, The Journal of urology.

[19]  Robert M Sweet,et al.  Review of trainers for transurethral resection of the prostate skills. , 2007, Journal of endourology.

[20]  R. Sweet,et al.  Task deconstruction facilitates acquisition of transurethral resection of prostate skills on a virtual reality trainer. , 2009, Journal of endourology.

[21]  H. Carnahan,et al.  Application of Motor Learning Principles to Complex Surgical Tasks: Searching for the Optimal Practice Schedule , 2007, Journal of motor behavior.

[22]  E. Salas,et al.  The science of training: a decade of progress. , 2001, Annual review of psychology.

[23]  R. Kacker,et al.  Endourologic procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia: review of indications and outcomes. , 2011, Urology journal.

[24]  Debra Nestel,et al.  Simulation for Learning and Teaching Procedural Skills: The State of the Science , 2011, Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare.

[25]  U. Steiner,et al.  Novel low‐cost prostate resection trainer—description and preliminary evaluation , 2011, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[26]  Timothy M. Kowalewski,et al.  Face, content and construct validity of the University of Washington virtual reality transurethral prostate resection trainer. , 2004, The Journal of urology.

[27]  Anup Patel,et al.  Transurethral resection of the prostate revisited and updated , 2011, Current opinion in urology.

[28]  A. Scherpbier,et al.  How useful and realistic is the uro trainer for training transurethral prostate and bladder tumor resection procedures? , 2009, The Journal of urology.

[29]  Fenwick W. English,et al.  Needs Assessment: Concept and Application , 1978 .

[30]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  Ten Steps to Complex Learning: A Systematic Approach to Four-Component Instructional Design , 2007 .

[31]  J. Svanvik,et al.  Use of a virtual reality, real-time, simulation model for the training of urologists in transurethral resection of the prostate , 2005, Scandinavian journal of urology and nephrology.

[32]  Mark R. Wilson,et al.  Face validity, construct validity and training benefits of a virtual reality TURP simulator. , 2012, International journal of surgery.

[33]  Irene M Tjiam,et al.  Designing simulator-based training: An approach integrating cognitive task analysis and four-component instructional design , 2012, Medical teacher.

[34]  Teodor P Grantcharov,et al.  A consensus-based framework for design, validation, and implementation of simulation-based training curricula in surgery. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[35]  W. McGaghie,et al.  Simulation technology for health care professional skills training and assessment. , 1999, JAMA.

[36]  Kenneth A. Yates,et al.  Advancing the practice of cognitive task analysis: a call for taxonomic research , 2011 .