Search

Objective: A randomised controlled trial (RCT) showed superior real life endovascular performance of trainees after PROficiency based StePwise Endovascular Curricular Training (PROSPECT) compared with traditional training. This study aimed to determine whether PROSPECT can be implemented routinely in surgical training (registry) and to identify the associated effects, facilitators, and barriers to implementation., Methods: This was a multicentre prospective registry to evaluate real life PROSPECT implementation effects. Cognitive ability was tested with a Multiple Choice Question test (MCQ) (max. score 20 points), while technical skills were assessed with a Global Rating Scale (GRS) (max. score 55 points), Examiner's Checklist (max, score 85 points), and simulator metrics. A cross sectional anonymous survey for both trainees and faculty evaluated the programme's implementation., Results: The PROSPECT registry was implemented in five centres in four countries over a period of three years. Only 17 of 48 starting trainees completed PROSPECT, resulting in a dropout rate of 65%. Participants who completed the programme showed significant improvement in the GRS (median 26 vs. 44, p = .018) and Examiner's Checklist (median 53.5 vs. 80, p = .028) after the programme. The survey was completed by 13/17 faculty members (76%) and 38/57 trainees who participated either in the initial PROSPECT RCT or the registry (67%). PROSPECT was perceived to provide more endovascular training opportunities, but non-availability of logistical/technical support, lack of training time within the working schedule, and little trainee motivation hindered broad implementation., Conclusion: PROSPECT has a significant effect on performance, and trainees and faculty agree that PROSPECT is a valuable addition to surgical training. However, external and internal factors pose significant barriers to integration of this simulation based programme into daily practice leading to a high dropout rate. To integrate PROSPECT into contemporary surgical training, it should be a prerequisite to treating real patients and protected training time should be provided, combined with accessible support., (Copyright © 2021 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The aim of this study was to analyze learning curves and competency gains of novice vascular trainees when performing open aortic repair in a simulation-based environment., Methods: This was a prospective study of 16 vascular trainees performing infrarenal open aortic repair on an inanimate abdominal aortic aneurysm simulator with pulsatile pressure and flow. Each participant performed 4 procedures as a primary surgeon while getting structured feedback by a supervising experienced vascular surgeon. All sessions were video recorded and were anonymously and independently assessed by 3 rater-trained experts on an online platform using the newly validated open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair of technical expertise assessment tool. All supervisor interferences and procedure time was noted., Results: Reliability between raters was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.92). Participants' mean scores almost doubled during the course between the first (13.4, 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.8-20) and fourth session (29.8, 95% CI, 26.3-33.3) with a mean difference of 14.6 (P < 0.001). Supervisor interference also decreased significantly from mean 3.0 (95% CI, 1.5-3.6) in the first to 0.7 (95% CI, 0.4-1.0) in the fourth session (P = 0.004). Procedure time decreased with a mean of 24 minutes: from 81 min (95% CI, 71.8-90.3) to 57 min (95% CI, 51.1-63.2, P < 0.001). There was a significant negative correlation between procedure time and the Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair of Technical Expertise score (Pearson's r = -0.72, P < 0.01). Only half of the participants passed the pass/fail score of 27.7 points during the course., Conclusions: Novice vascular trainees achieve skills and competencies in open aortic repair in a simulated setting with dedicated supervision and feedback and can become ready for supervised surgery on real patients. Learning rates are individual, and it is important to construct training programs with emphasis on proficiency and not merely attending a course., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature and give evidence based recommendations for future initiatives for simulation based training (SBT) and assessment in open vascular surgery., Data Sources: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library., Review Methods: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed, with the last search on 31 March 2020, to identify studies describing SBT and assessment in open vascular surgery. Kirkpatrick's levels for efficacy of training were evaluated. Validity evidence for assessment tools was evaluated according to the recommended contemporary framework by Messick., Results: Of 2 844 studies, 51 were included for data extraction. A high degree of heterogeneity in reporting standards and varying types of simulation was found. Vascular anastomosis was the most frequently simulated technical skill (43%). Assessment was mostly carried out using the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (55%). Validity evidence for assessment tools was found using outdated frameworks, and only one study used Messick's framework. Self directed training is valuable, the low trainer to trainee ratio is important to maximise efficiency, and experienced vascular surgeons are the most effective trainers., Conclusion: Carefully designed and structured SBT is effective and can improve technical skills, especially in less experienced trainees. However, the supporting evidence lacks homogeneity in the reporting standards and types of simulations. Pass/fail standards that support proficiency based learning and studies investigating skills transfer should be the focus in future studies. Validity evidence of assessment tools needs to be addressed using contemporary frameworks., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest None., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background and Aim: Recognition of structured training in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for vascular trainees is increasing. Nevertheless, how trainees can achieve sufficient skills in EVAR sizing and graft selection is sparsely described. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of systematic training in basic EVAR sizing and graft selection on vascular surgery trainees using a validated assessment tool., Methods: Sixteen vascular surgery trainees were included in an intensive 6-h hands-on workshop in aortic sizing and stent graft selection for EVAR with a trainer-to-trainee ratio of 1:2. After 1-h lecture, participants did 5 h of supervised training on increasingly complex cases. Finally, the participants were tested using a validated assessment tool., Results: All participants were able to size the test-case and select a stent graft combination in 24:35 (13:30-48:20) min (median and range). The participants' overall test scores (lower is better) were in median 17.9 (11.9-28.4). This did not differ from the scores of experienced EVAR operators 14.7 (11.7-25.2) (<200 EVAR's) ( p  = .32) but was inferior to the score of EVAR experts 11.2 (9.8 -18.7) (≥200 EVAR's) ( p  = .01). The sub-score for anatomical measurements was 10.6 (3.9-18.8) and comparable with the experienced group 9.7 (8.1-12.8) ( p  = .83) but inferior to the expert operators 6.5 (5.2-10.2) ( p  = .04). The sub-score for stent graft selection was 7.5 (4.9-14.1) and comparable with experienced operators scoring 4.5 (3.6-12.3) ( p  = .09) but inferior to the expert operators score of 5.0 (3.6-8.4) ( p  = .01)., Conclusion: This study presents the results of a standardised one-day basic EVAR sizing and graft selection workshop. Vascular surgery trainees with no prior EVAR experience learned to size and select stent grafts for a simple infra-renal AAA on par with experienced EVAR operators.

Objective: The aims of this study were to develop a procedure specific assessment tool for open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair, gather validity evidence for the tool and establish a pass/fail standard., Methods: Validity was studied based on the contemporary framework by Messick. Three vascular surgeons experienced in open AAA repair and an expert in assessment and validation within medical education developed the OPEn aortic aneurysm Repair Assessment of Technical Expertise (OPERATE) tool. Vascular surgeons with varying experiences performed open AAA repair in a standardised simulation based setting. All procedures were video recorded with the faces anonymised and scored independently by three experts in a mutual blinded setup. The Angoff standard setting method was used to establish a credible pass/fail score., Results: Sixteen novices and nine experienced open vascular surgeons were enrolled. The OPERATE tool achieved high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha .92) and inter-rater reliability (Cronbach's alpha .95) and was able to differentiate novices and experienced surgeons with mean scores (higher score is better) of 13.4 ± 12 and 25.6 ± 6, respectively (p = .01). The pass/fail score was set high (27.7). One novice passed the test while six experienced surgeons failed., Conclusion: Validity evidence was established for the newly developed OPERATE tool and was able to differentiate between novices and experienced surgeons providing a good argument that this tool can be used for both formative and summative assessment in a simulation based environment. The high pass/fail score emphasises the need for novices to train in a simulation based environment up to a certain level of competency before apprenticeship training in the clinical environment under the tutelage of a supervisor. Familiarisation with the simulation equipment must be ensured before performance is assessed as reflected by the low scores in the experienced group's first attempt., (Copyright © 2020 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To gather consensus among European educators about technical procedures that should be included in a future simulation based curriculum in vascular surgery., Methods: A three round modified Delphi survey was initiated among 189 key opinion leaders (KOL) from 34 countries across Europe who were identified according to their positions in the European Society for Vascular Surgery, the European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, and Union Européenne des Médecins Spécialistes Section and Board of Vascular Surgery. The first round was a brainstorming phase to identify technical procedures that a newly qualified vascular surgeon should be able to perform. The answers were analysed qualitatively. The second round investigated how often the identified procedures are performed, the number of vascular surgeons that should be able to perform these procedures, whether the procedures pose a risk to the patients, and whether simulation based education (SBE) is feasible. In the third round, elimination and re-ranking of procedures were performed. Only procedures that gained more than 70% support were included. An international steering group consisting of open and endovascular surgeons and medical educators governed the process., Results: Response rates in the three rounds were 75% (142/189), 89% (126/142), and 85% (107/126), respectively. In the final prioritised list of 30 technical procedures for SBE, the top five procedures focus on basic open vascular skills, basic endovascular skills, vascular imaging interpretation, femoral endarterectomy, and open peripheral bypass. Twenty-six procedures were eliminated, including peripheral pressure measurement, wound management, open management of complications, major amputations, and highly advanced endovascular skills., Conclusion: The prioritised list of technical procedures from this ESVS supported project could be used to guide planning and development of future SBE programs to meet the needs of vascular surgeons across Europe., (Copyright © 2019 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives and Background: Practical skills training in vascular surgery is facing challenges because of an increased number of endovascular procedures and fewer open procedures, as well as a move away from the traditional principle of "learning by doing." This change has established simulation as a cornerstone in providing trainees with the necessary skills and competences. However, the development of simulation based programs often evolves based on available resources and equipment, reflecting convenience rather than a systematic educational plan. The objective of the present study was to perform a national needs assessment to identify the technical procedures that should be integrated in a simulation based curriculum., Design and Methods: A national needs assessment using a Delphi process was initiated by engaging 33 predefined key persons in vascular surgery. Round 1 was a brainstorming phase to identify technical procedures that vascular surgeons should learn. Round 2 was a survey that used a needs assessment formula to explore the frequency of procedures, the number of surgeons performing each procedure, risk and/or discomfort, and feasibility for simulation based training. Round 3 involved elimination and ranking of procedures., Results: The response rate for round 1 was 70%, with 36 procedures identified. Round 2 had a 76% response rate and resulted in a preliminary prioritised list after exploring the need for simulation based training. Round 3 had an 85% response rate; 17 procedures were eliminated, resulting in a final prioritised list of 19 technical procedures., Conclusion: A national needs assessment using a standardised Delphi method identified a list of procedures that are highly suitable and may provide the basis for future simulation based training programs for vascular surgeons in training., (Copyright © 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)