In the Fundamentals of Endovascular and Vascular Surgery model motion metrics reliably differentiate competency
In the Fundamentals of Endovascular and Vascular Surgery model motion metrics reliably differentiate competency
复制标题
在血管内和血管外科模型的基础知识中，运动指标可靠地区分能力
DOI：
10.1016/j.jvs.2020.02.047
复制
发表时间：
2020
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Bismuth, Jean
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Belvroy, Viony M.;Murali, Barathwaj;Sheahan, Malachi G.;O'Malley, Marcia K.;Bismuth, Jean
血管内和血管外科的基础，包括技能测试的血管内模型的课程，旨在区分有能力和无能力的表演者。我们的研究的目的是进一步验证模型，并测试其可靠性，在评估血管内学员在一个不受控制的setting.MethodsThe模型的性能进行了测试，完全在虚拟现实环境中。根据其血管内治疗经验，将52名参与者分为三组：新手（<50例血管内治疗病例）、中级（50-500例血管内治疗病例）和专家（>500例血管内治疗病例）。在四个任务中评估性能，测量虚拟模型上的工具尖端位置和速度。平均刀尖速度和速度频域中的运动平滑度是定义运动熟练度的验证参数。对数据进行过滤和插值以计算度量。包含关键工具操作错误的试验excluded.ResultsIn总，新手完成的52个任务，25个完成的中间体，和38个完成的专家进行了分析，以确定性能。对于导丝平滑度，新手组和专家组之间的性能差异具有统计学意义（P< .001）。专家组有一个统计学显着较高的平均导丝速度相比，新手group.ConclusionsThe血管内和血管外科模型的基础上，他们的处理导丝和导管工具，测量平滑度和速度继续区分新手从专家。该模型提供了一个有用的工具来测试血管内外科医生的能力。
ObjectiveThe Fundamentals of Endovascular and Vascular Surgery, a curriculum that includes an endovascular model for skills testing, aims to differentiate between competent and noncompetent performers. The aim of our study was to further validate the model and to test its reliability in assessing the performance of endovascular trainees in an uncontrolled setting.MethodsThe model was tested exclusively in a virtual reality environment. On the basis of their endovascular experience, 52 participants were divided into three groups: novice (<50 endovascular cases), intermediate (50-500 endovascular cases), and expert (>500 endovascular cases). Performance was evaluated in four tasks, measuring the tool tip position and velocity on the virtual model. Average tool tip velocity and movement smoothness in the velocity frequency domain are validated parameters defining proficiency of movement. The data were filtered and interpolated to calculate the metrics. Trials containing critical tool manipulation errors were excluded.ResultsIn total, 52 tasks completed by novices, 25 completed by intermediates, and 38 completed by experts were analyzed to determine performance. The difference in performance between the novice and expert groups was statistically significant for guidewire smoothness (P< .001). The expert group had a statistically significantly higher average guidewire velocity compared with the novice group (P< .001).ConclusionsThe Fundamentals of Endovascular and Vascular Surgery model continues to differentiate novices from experts on the basis of their handling of guidewire and catheter tools, measured as smoothness and velocity. This model offers a useful instrument to test competency of endovascular surgeons.