Traditional Versus Simulation Resident Surgical Laparoscopic Salpingectomy Training: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Abstract Study Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of the porcine training model for obstetrics-gynecology (OB/GYN) residents in laparoscopic salpingectomy. Design Randomized, controlled single-blinded trial. Classification Canadian Task Force Classification I. Setting A large community-based teaching hospital. Participants All postgraduate year 1 through year 4 OB/GYN residents were enrolled (n = 22). Intervention All participants underwent a preintervention objective skills assessment test (OSAT), in which the participant performed live human laparoscopic salpingectomy. Residents were randomly assigned (using a computer-generated randomization table, in blocks of 2, stratified by ranked baseline OSAT scores) to the intervention or control group. The intervention group consisted of 1 educational session with presession assigned reading, a 40-min didactic lecture, viewing of a procedural video, and simulation and practice of laparoscopic salpingectomy on a porcine cadaver. The control group received traditional training per routine residency rotations. Measurements and Main Results Laparoscopic salpingectomy was performed on live patients by study participants pre- and postintervention. These procedures were video recorded, and then scored by a single blinded evaluator of the OSATs. Nine pre- and postintervention OSAT indicators, reflecting provider knowledge and skill, were the primary outcome measures. Secondary outcomes were the changes in 10 subjective measures of comfort, assessed by a pre- and postintervention survey. The outcomes were assessed using 5-point Likert scales (for OSATs 1 = lowest score; for the subjective survey 1 = highest score). The control group OSAT scores did not change (pre: 26.6 ± 10.8, post: 26.2 ± 10.1; p = .65). There were significant improvements in 2-handed surgery (pre: 2.8 ± 1.6, post: 3.5 ± 1.3; p = .004) and use of energy (pre: 2.9 ± 1.3, post: 3.6 ± 1.0; p = .01) in the intervention group, contributing to an overall score change (pre: 26.7 ± 10.6, post: 29.9 ± 9.8; p ≤ .001). The control group had no change in comfort levels. The intervention group experienced both increases (anatomy, steps of surgery, 2-handed surgery, and use of energy) and decreases (reading and learning in operating room) in reported comfort levels. Conclusion This study demonstrates that simulation can improve surgical technique OSATs. However, of 45 possible points, both groups' average scores were