An objective skill assessment framework for microsurgical anastomosis based on ALI scores
Acta Neurochirurgica, ISSN: 0942-0940, Vol: 166, Issue: 1, Page: 104
2024
- 5Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures5
- Readers5
Article Description
Introduction: The current assessment and standardization of microsurgical skills are subjective, posing challenges in reliable skill evaluation. We aim to address these limitations by developing a quantitative and objective framework for accurately assessing and enhancing microsurgical anastomosis skills among surgical trainees. We hypothesize that this framework can differentiate the proficiency levels of microsurgeons, aligning with subjective assessments based on the ALI score. Methods: We select relevant performance metrics from the literature on laparoscopic skill assessment and human motor control studies, focusing on time, instrument kinematics, and tactile information. This information is measured and estimated by a set of sensors, including cameras, a motion capture system, and tactile sensors. The recorded data is analyzed offline using our proposed evaluation framework. Our study involves 12 participants of different ages (35.42±9.78 years) and genders (nine males and three females), including six novice and six intermediate subjects, who perform surgical anastomosis procedures on a chicken leg model. Results: We show that the proposed set of objective and quantitative metrics to assess skill proficiency aligns with subjective evaluations, particularly the ALI score method, and can effectively differentiate novices from more proficient microsurgeons. Furthermore, we find statistically significant disparities, where microsurgeons with intermediate level of skill proficiency surpassed novices in both task speed, reduced idle time, and smoother, briefer hand displacements. Conclusion: The framework enables accurate skill assessment and provides objective feedback for improving microsurgical anastomosis skills among surgical trainees. By overcoming the subjectivity and limitations of current assessment methods, our approach contributes to the advancement of surgical education and the development of aspiring microsurgeons. Furthermore, our framework emerges to precisely distinguish and classify proficiency levels (novice and intermediate) exhibited by microsurgeons.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85185919900&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-024-05934-1; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38400918; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00701-024-05934-1; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-024-05934-1; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00701-024-05934-1
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know