Fulltext

Evaluation of a new virtual-reality training simulator for hysteroscopy

Bajka, Michael ; Tuchschmid, Stefan ; Streich, Matthias ; Fink, Daniel ; Székely, Gábor ; Harders, Matthias

In: Surgical Endoscopy, 2009, vol. 23, no. 9, p. 2026-2033

Zum persönliche Liste hinzufügen
    Titel
    • Evaluation of a new virtual-reality training simulator for hysteroscopy
    Autor
    • Bajka, Michael. Clinic of Gynaecology, Dept. OB/GYN, University Hospital Zurich, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Tuchschmid, Stefan. Computer Vision Laboratory, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Streich, Matthias. Clinic of Gynaecology, Dept. OB/GYN, University Hospital Zurich, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Fink, Daniel. Clinic of Gynaecology, Dept. OB/GYN, University Hospital Zurich, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Székely, Gábor. Computer Vision Laboratory, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Harders, Matthias. Computer Vision Laboratory, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Dokumententyp
    • Postprint
    Sprache
    • Englisch
    Veröffentlicht in
    • Surgical Endoscopy, 2009, vol. 23, no. 9, p. 2026-2033. Springer-Verlag
    Andere elektronische Ausgabe
    OAI-PMH-ID
    • oai:doc.rero.ch:319856
    Summary
    Background: To determine realism and training capacity of HystSim, a new virtual-reality simulator for the training of hysteroscopic interventions. Methods: Sixty-two gynaecological surgeons with various levels of expertise were interviewed at the 13th Practical Course in Gynaecologic Endoscopy in Davos, Switzerland. All participants received a 20-min hands-on training on the simulator and filled out a four-page questionnaire. Twenty-three questions with respect to the realism of the simulation and the training capacity were answered on a seven-point Likert scale along with 11 agree-disagree statements concerning the HystSim training in general. Results: Twenty-six participants had performed more than 50 hysteroscopies ("experts”) and 36 equal to or fewer than 50 ("novices”). Four of 60 (6.6%) responding participants judged the overall impression as "7 - absolutely realistic”, 40 (66.6%) as "6 - realistic”, and 16 (26.6%) as "5 - somewhat realistic”. Novices (6.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.28-6.7) rated the overall training capacity significantly higher than experts (6.08; 95% CI 5.85-6.3), however, high-grade acceptance was found in both groups. In response to the statements, 95.2% believe that HystSim allows procedural training of diagnostic and therapeutic hysteroscopy, and 85.5% suggest that HystSim training should be offered to all novices before performing surgery on real patients. Conclusion: Face validity has been established for a new hysteroscopic surgery simulator. Potential trainees and trainers assess it to be a realistic and useful tool for the training of hysteroscopy. Further systematic validation studies are needed to clarify how this system can be optimally integrated into the gynaecological curriculum