Video-based Coaching (VBC) in Gynecologic Surgery

Titre officiel

A Multicentre, Randomized Controlled Trial to Assess Video-based Feedback for Surgical Coaching in Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology

Sommaire:

Cet essai contrôlé, multicentrique et à répartition aléatoire vise à évaluer le rôle d’un accompagnement par vidéo (APV) proposé dans le cadre d’une résidence en chirurgie gynécologique et gynéco-oncologique. Dans le cadre de cet accompagnement, un résident et un chirurgien expérimenté (formateur) visionnent ensemble un enregistrement du résident en train d’exécuter une intervention ou un acte chirurgical. Cet accompagnement vise à améliorer les compétences du résident. Les compétences du résident seront évaluées à l’aide d’une échelle de notation standardisée par deux chirurgiens expérimentés, avant et après l’intervention, et comparées à celles du groupe témoin recevant le programme d’enseignement chirurgical standard.

Description de l'essai

Primary Outcome:

• Mean change from baseline in modified-OSATS (Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill) score after video-based coaching intervention compared to control of standard surgical teaching

Secondary Outcome:

• Participant assessment of desirability of video-based surgical coaching
• Participant assessment of usefulness of video-based surgical coaching
• Surgical coach assessment of feasibility of video-based surgical coaching
• Inter-rater reliability of the video evaluations by the blinded, experienced laparoscopists

Achieving technical excellence is a core component of surgical training. Historically, a combination of didactic teaching, surgical simulation and the master-apprentice model (MAM) were the cornerstone of surgical education. With restrictions on resident duty hours and operating time with the COVID-19 pandemic and a shift to competency-based medical education, there is an opportunity to transform surgical education and improve educational efficiency. The purpose of this study is to assess the effect of video-based coaching (VBC) on resident skill acquisition in laparoscopic suturing of the vaginal vault at the time of laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Participants will include year 3 to 5 Obstetrics and Gynecology residents completing gynecology and gynecologic oncology rotations at the study sites. Participants will be randomized to the control (standard surgical curriculum) and intervention (standard curriculum and VBC) arms on the day of the first attempt. The effectiveness of VBC will be measured by the difference in baseline and post-intervention standardized blinded score between the intervention and control group during laparoscopic closure of the vaginal cuff.

All residents will be video recorded performing laparoscopic closure of the vaginal cuff at the time of hysterectomy using video recording built into the laparoscopic equipment in the operating rooms. Residents in the control group will receive standard surgical teaching (MAM), then they will be video-recorded performing the skill at their second attempt. Residents in the intervention group will receive the standard surgical teaching plus the intervention of reviewing the recorded video with the surgical coach at the end of the procedure (MAM plus VBC). The surgical coach will provide specific personalized feedback on performance and suggestions for improvement following the Wisconsin Coaching Framework during their coaching session. Participants will then be recorded on their subsequent attempt.

All raw video footage will be edited to include only the relevant portion of the film. This will facilitate the assessment process (i.e., the assessors will view only the relevant footage). The edited video segments for both groups on both attempts will be scored independently using the validated surgical assessment tool by two blinded, experienced gynecologic laparoscopists to evaluate surgical performance (blinded to attempt number and randomization group). The average score between both assessors will be used for statistical analysis. The effectiveness of VBC will be evaluated by comparing the difference in assessment scores between the baseline and post-intervention scores between the control and intervention groups.

Voir cet essai sur ClinicalTrials.gov