title: Validation of laparoscopic surgical skills training outside the operating room: a long road.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Surgical skills training outside the operating room is beneficial. The best methods have yet to be identified. The authors aimed to document the predictive validity of simulation training in three different studies.
  
  
  METHODS
  Study 1 was a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial comparing performance in the operating room after training on a laparoscopic simulator and after no training. The Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) was used to evaluate operative performance. Study 2 retrospectively reviewed the operative performance of junior residents before and after implementation of a laparoscopic skills training curriculum. Operative time was the variable used to determine resident improvement. Study 3 was a prospective, randomized trial evaluating intern operative performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a porcine model before and after training on a simulator. Operative performance was assessed using GOALS.
  
  
  RESULTS
  All three studies failed to demonstrate predictive validity. With GOALS used as the assessment tool, no difference was found between trained and untrained residents in studies 1 and 3. In study 2, the trained group took significantly longer to complete a laparoscopic cholecystectomy than the untrained group.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  No correlation was found between the three types of training outside the operating room, and no improved operative performance was observed. Possible explanations include too few subjects, training introduced too late in the learning curve, and training criteria that were too easy. Additionally, simulator training focuses on precision, which may actually increase task time. Awareness of these issues can improve the design of future studies.
authors.affiliation: Department of Surgery, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
authors.forename: N J
authors.initials: NJ
authors.lastname: Hogle
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Chang
authors.forename: V E M
authors.initials: VE
authors.lastname: Strong
authors.forename: A O U
authors.initials: AO
authors.lastname: Welcome
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Sinaan
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Bailey
authors.forename: D L
authors.initials: DL
authors.lastname: Fowler
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000818:Animals; D017081:Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic / Q000193:education*; D002983:Clinical Competence; D003162:Competency-Based Education; D003198:Computer Simulation; D003194:Computer-Assisted Instruction / Q000295:instrumentation; D003479:Curriculum; D004521:Educational Measurement; D013502:General Surgery / Q000193:education*; D006801:Humans; D007396:Internship and Residency / Q000379:methods* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011597:Psychomotor Performance; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013536:Suture Techniques / Q000193:education; D013552:Swine; D014584:User-Computer Interface