Abstract

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.

中文翻译：

---

评估“腹腔镜基本技能教学指南”作为动手培训课程的独立教育工具：一项试点研究

摘要

介绍和目标

在过去十年中，实践培训 (HoT) 的标准化对教育领域产生了深远的影响。为了在全球范围内提供高质量的培训课程，欧洲泌尿外科学院培训小组于 2015 年为导师制定了教学指南。我们的研究旨在了解仅凭该指南是否能够提供足够的信息以匹配专家导师保证的绩效改进。

材料与方法

4 个随机组的参与者接受了具有不同教学方式的 HoT 课程：专家外科医生（第 1 组）、专家 E-BLUS 导师（第 2 组）、单独的 E-BLUS 指南（第 3 组）、无导师（第 4 组）。第 1 组和第 2 组分别配备了两名不同的导师，以避免与个人导师能力相关的偏见。在培训期间，每个参与者可以对两个 E-BLUS 任务进行五次试验：钉转移和打结。在试验 1 和 5 期间，记录完成时间和错误数量以使用 Pi-score 算法进行分析。然后比较每组的平均 Pi 分数以衡量不同的性能改进结果。

结果

来自意大利的 60 名参与者被纳入并随机分为四组，每组 15 人。 Peg 转移任务记录的 Pi 分数为 24,6（第 1 组）、26,4（第 2 组）、42,2（第 3 组）、11,7 （第 4 组）。在打结任务上记录的 Pi 分数为 33,2（第 1 组）、31,3（第 2 组）、37,5（第 3 组）、18,6（第 4 组）。

结论

与人类导师相比，使用 EBLUS 指南的标准化教学可能会产生类似的性能改进。这一证据为自动化教学和实践培训中的一些新事物打开了大门。