Search

Objective: Different simulation modalities may be utilised in a curricular fashion to benefit from the strengths of each training model. The aim of this study is to evaluate a novel multi-modality ureterorenoscopy (URS) simulation curriculum in terms of educational value, content validity, transfer of skills and inter-rater reliability. Methods: This international prospective study recruited urology residents (n = 46) with ≤ 10 URS experience and no prior simulation training. Participants were guided through each phase of the expert-developed SIMULATE URS curriculum by trainers and followed-up in the operating room (OR). Video recordings were obtained during training. A post-training evaluation survey was distributed to evaluate content validity and educational value, using descriptive statistics. Performance was evaluated using the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) scale to measure improvement in scores throughout the curriculum. Pearson's correlation coefficient and Cohen's kappa tests were utilised to investigate correlation and agreement between raters. Results: Participants reported gaining OR-transferrable skills (Mean: 4.33 ± 0.67) and demonstrated marked improvement in throughout the curriculum, transferred to the OR for both semi-rigid URS (p = 0.004) and flexible URS (p = 0.007). 70% of participants were successfully followed-up in the OR (n = 32). No differences were identified with the additional use of fresh frozen cadavers (p = 0.85, p = 0.90) and the URO Mentor VR simulator (p = 0.13, p = 0.22). A moderate level of correlation was noted on the video OSATS assessments, between two expert assessors (r = 0.70), but a poor agreement with the live rating. Conclusion: The SIMULATE URS training curriculum received high educational value from participants, who demonstrated statistically significant improvement with consecutive cases throughout the curriculum and transferability of skills to the OR in both semi-rigid and flexible URS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction and objectives: Standardization of hands-on training (HoT) has profoundly impacted the educational field in the last decade. To provide quality training sessions on a global scale, the European School of Urology Training group developed a teaching guide for tutors in 2015. Our study aims to understand whether this guide alone can provide information enough to match the performance improvement guaranteed by an expert tutor. Material and methods: 4 randomized groups of participants underwent HoT sessions with different teaching modalities: an expert surgeon (group 1), an expert E-BLUS tutor (group 2), E-BLUS guide alone (group 3), no tutor (group 4). Groups 1 and 2 were respectively provided with two different tutors to avoid biases related to personal tutor ability. Along the training session, each participant could perform five trials on two E-BLUS tasks: Peg transfer and Knot tying. During trials 1 and 5, completion time and number of errors were recorded for analysis with Pi-score algorithm. The average per-group Pi-scores were then compared to measure different performance improvement results. Results: 60 participants from Italy were enrolled and randomized into four groups of 15. Pi-scores recorded on Peg transfer task were 24,6 (group 1), 26,4 (group 2), 42,2 (group 3), 11,7 (group 4). Pi-scores recorded on Knot tying task were 33,2 (group 1), 31,3 (group 2), 37,5 (group 3), 18,6 (group 4). Conclusion: Compared to a human tutor, standardized teaching with the EBLUS guide may produce similar performance improvement. This evidence opens doors to automated teaching and to several novelties in hands-on training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The endoscopic stone treatment step 1 (EST s1) protocol has been developed after 2 years of collaborative work between different European Association of Urology (EAU) sections. Objectives: In this study, we added construct validity evidence to the EST s1 curriculum. Materials and methods: The EST-s1 curriculum includes four standardized tasks: flexible cystoscopy, rigid cystoscopy, semi-rigid URS and flexible URS. Validation was performed during the annual 2016 EUREP meeting in Prague. 124 participants provided information on their endoscopic logbook and carried out these 4 tasks during a DVD recorded session. Recordings were anonymized and blindly assessed independently by five proctors. Inter-rater reliability was checked on a sample of five videos by the calculation of intra-class correlation coefficient. Task-specific clinical background of participants was correlated with their personal performance on the simulator. Breakpoint analysis was used to define the minimum number of performed cases, to be considered "proficient". "Proficient" and "Non-proficient" groups were compared for construct validity assessment. Likert scale-based questionnaires were used to test content and to comment on when the EST-s1 exams should be undertaken within the residency program. Results: 124 participants (105 final-year residents and 19 faculty members) took part in this study. The breakpoint analysis showed a significant change in performance curve at 36, 41, 67 and 206 s, respectively, corresponding to 30, 60, 25 and 120 clinical cases for each of the 4 tasks. EST-s1 was scored as a valid training tool, correctly representing the procedures performed in each task. Experts felt that this curriculum is best used during the third year of residency training. Conclusion: Our validation study successfully demonstrated correlation between clinical expertise and EST-s1 tasks, adding construct validity evidence to it. Our work also demonstrates the successful collaboration established within various EAU sections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]