Dataset Information

Surgeon Level of Expertise in Adult Reconstruction: A Brief Communication Regarding the Need for Reporting the Level of Expertise.

ABSTRACT: The purpose of the current brief communication is to establish a discussion regarding level of expertise (LOE) documentation in future arthroplasty clinical studies and to document the trend in adoption of LOE among arthroplasty publications to date. A review of Arthroplasty Today, Journal of Arthroplasty (JOA), Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS), and International Orthopedics (IO) databases for original studies published between April 2016 and July 2020 was performed. A total of 105 articles were identified and evaluated in Arthroplasty Today, 1011 in JOA, 127 in JBJS, and 383 in IO. Of 1011 articles identified in JOA, only one manuscript (1/1011; 0.1%), by Uluyardimci et.al, included the LOE of the surgeon(s) involved in the study. No articles in Arthroplasty Today (0/125; 0%), JBJS (0/127; 0%), or IO (0/383; 0%) reported the LOE according to Tang's recommendations during the same period. Documenting LOE may provide readers with additional information for incorporation of novel techniques into their practices as well as identify procedures that require a baseline LOE for effective performance. Further evaluation of LOE criteria may improve the reliability of the numeric scale, while widespread adoption of this scale will allow future outcome analysis by LOE.

SUBMITTER: Yakkanti RR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7899946 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Surgeon Level of Expertise in Adult Reconstruction: A Brief Communication Regarding the Need for Reporting the Level of Expertise.

Yakkanti Ramakanth R RR Massel Dustin H DH Lezak Bradley A BA Haziza Sagie S Milner Jacob E JE Chen David D Hernandez Victor H VH

Arthroplasty today 20210217

The purpose of the current brief communication is to establish a discussion regarding level of expertise (LOE) documentation in future arthroplasty clinical studies and to document the trend in adoption of LOE among arthroplasty publications to date. A review of Arthroplasty Today, Journal of Arthroplasty (JOA), Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS), and International Orthopedics (IO) databases for original studies published between April 2016 and Jul ...[more]

PMID: 33665274

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeIn this study, we investigate the ability of automated performance metrics (APMs) and task-evoked pupillary response (TEPR), as objective measures of surgeon performance, to distinguish varying levels of surgeon expertise during generic robotic surgical tasks. Additionally, we evaluate the association between APMs and TEPR.MethodsParticipants completed ten tasks on a da Vinci Xi Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Inc.), each representing a surgical skill type: EndoWrist® manipulation, needle targeting, suturing/knot tying, and excision/dissection. Automated performance metrics (instrument motion tracking, EndoWrist® articulation, and system events data) and TEPR were recorded by a systems data recorder (Intuitive Surgical, Inc.) and Tobii Pro Glasses 2 (Tobii Technologies, Inc.), respectively. The Kruskal-Wallis test determined significant differences between groups of varying expertise. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient measured associations between APMs and TEPR.ResultsTwenty-six participants were stratified by robotic surgical experience: novice (no prior experience; n = 9), intermediate (< 100 cases; n = 9), and experts (≥ 100 cases; n = 8). Several APMs differentiated surgeon experience including task duration (p < 0.01), time active of instruments (p < 0.03), linear velocity of instruments (p < 0.04), and angular velocity of dominant instrument (p < 0.04). Task-evoked pupillary response distinguished surgeon expertise for three out of four task types (p < 0.04). Correlation trends between APMs and TEPR revealed that expert surgeons move more slowly with high cognitive workload (ρ < - 0.60, p < 0.05), while novices move faster under the same cognitive experiences (ρ > 0.66, p < 0.05).ConclusionsAutomated performance metrics and TEPR can distinguish surgeon expertise levels during robotic surgical tasks. Furthermore, under high cognitive workload, there can be a divergence in robotic movement profiles between expertise levels.

Project description:ObjectiveClinical guidelines are designed to optimise patient care and provide efficient approaches for therapy. Epilepsy is a chronic brain disorder that continues to experience a considerable treatment gap due to non-standard recommendations. We assessed the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on epilepsy over the past 5 years to generate a reporting specification for this study.SettingSeven databases were searched in May 2018 focusing on the period from 2013 to 2018. These included Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang and Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP). Reporting quality of epilepsy guidelines was assessed by two independent authors using the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) approach. Spearman's correlation was used to assess inter-rater reliability.ParticipantsParticipants with epilepsy or seizure, not limited by age, gender, course of disease or cause of epilepsy, were included.InterventionsThere were no limitations with regard to intervention.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe outcome was the ability of the RIGHT tool to measure reporting quality.ResultsTwelve relevant guidelines were included in this study. The reporting quality was not high in any of the included guidelines. The highest reporting quality included a 'yes' proportion of 77.1%, whereas the worst included a corresponding proportion of 37.1%. Overall evaluation results showed that 16.7% of the included guidelines were of high quality, 75% were of medium quality and 8.3% were of low quality. The correlation between the two estimators was credible (ρ>0.7).ConclusionsAppraisal of these guidelines using the RIGHT tool revealed that the quality of reporting varied among guidelines. Items that exhibited low quality in most included guidelines were healthcare questions, rationale/explanation for recommendations, quality assurance, funding source(s) and role(s) of the funder, and limitations of the guideline. Thus, these aspects should receive greater attention in future guideline reporting.

Dataset Information

Surgeon Level of Expertise in Adult Reconstruction: A Brief Communication Regarding the Need for Reporting the Level of Expertise.

Publications

Surgeon Level of Expertise in Adult Reconstruction: A Brief Communication Regarding the Need for Reporting the Level of Expertise.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets