Analysis of a Computer Based Simulator as an Educational Tool for Cystoscopy: Subjective and Objective Results

Matthew T. Gettman, Carter Q. Le, Laureano J. Rangel, Jeffrey M. Slezak, Eric J. Bergstralh, Amy Krambeck

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Resident education in cystoscopy has traditionally relied on clinical instruction. However, simulators are now available outside the clinical setting. We evaluated a simulator for flexible and rigid cystoscopy. Materials and Methods: We evaluated 30 novice and 27 expert cystoscopists on a computer based cystoscopic simulator (UroMentor, Simbionix, Lod, Israel). All subjects performed 5 trials of 3 basic cystoscopic tasks. The objective measurement was procedure time, and subjective measures were assessment of the simulator and individual tasks by the cystoscopist. Repeated measures analyses were performed using mixed effects regression models. Results: There was a significant difference in median age between novice and expert cystoscopists at 46 (range 25 to 63) and 35 (range 28 to 68) years old, respectively (p = 0.014). Experts completed simulations significantly faster than novices in all trials. For the first trial median times (novice vs expert) were 300 vs 68 seconds (p <0.001) for guide wire placement, 650 vs 179 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder examination and 119 vs 71 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder lesion fulguration. At the fifth trial median times (novice vs expert) were 57 vs 31 seconds (p = 0.001) for guide wire placement, 164 vs 67 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder examination and 55 vs 40 seconds (p = 0.007) for bladder lesion fulguration. Subjective task evaluations were lower in novice subjects but improved after training. Subjective simulator evaluations were more favorable in novice subjects. Conclusions: Objectively, expert and novice performance of cystoscopic tasks can be distinguished with the UroMentor. Subjective assessments suggest ongoing refinement of the simulator as a learning tool for cystoscopic skills training.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)267-271
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume179
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Cystoscopy
Urinary Bladder
Task Performance and Analysis
Israel
Learning
Education

Keywords

  • computer simulation
  • cystoscopy
  • education
  • educational technology
  • manikins

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Analysis of a Computer Based Simulator as an Educational Tool for Cystoscopy : Subjective and Objective Results. / Gettman, Matthew T.; Le, Carter Q.; Rangel, Laureano J.; Slezak, Jeffrey M.; Bergstralh, Eric J.; Krambeck, Amy.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 179, No. 1, 01.2008, p. 267-271.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gettman, Matthew T. ; Le, Carter Q. ; Rangel, Laureano J. ; Slezak, Jeffrey M. ; Bergstralh, Eric J. ; Krambeck, Amy. / Analysis of a Computer Based Simulator as an Educational Tool for Cystoscopy : Subjective and Objective Results. In: Journal of Urology. 2008 ; Vol. 179, No. 1. pp. 267-271.
@article{1a934e8fdb504e7cbfe8f5e3bc0d4fcb,
title = "Analysis of a Computer Based Simulator as an Educational Tool for Cystoscopy: Subjective and Objective Results",
abstract = "Purpose: Resident education in cystoscopy has traditionally relied on clinical instruction. However, simulators are now available outside the clinical setting. We evaluated a simulator for flexible and rigid cystoscopy. Materials and Methods: We evaluated 30 novice and 27 expert cystoscopists on a computer based cystoscopic simulator (UroMentor, Simbionix, Lod, Israel). All subjects performed 5 trials of 3 basic cystoscopic tasks. The objective measurement was procedure time, and subjective measures were assessment of the simulator and individual tasks by the cystoscopist. Repeated measures analyses were performed using mixed effects regression models. Results: There was a significant difference in median age between novice and expert cystoscopists at 46 (range 25 to 63) and 35 (range 28 to 68) years old, respectively (p = 0.014). Experts completed simulations significantly faster than novices in all trials. For the first trial median times (novice vs expert) were 300 vs 68 seconds (p <0.001) for guide wire placement, 650 vs 179 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder examination and 119 vs 71 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder lesion fulguration. At the fifth trial median times (novice vs expert) were 57 vs 31 seconds (p = 0.001) for guide wire placement, 164 vs 67 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder examination and 55 vs 40 seconds (p = 0.007) for bladder lesion fulguration. Subjective task evaluations were lower in novice subjects but improved after training. Subjective simulator evaluations were more favorable in novice subjects. Conclusions: Objectively, expert and novice performance of cystoscopic tasks can be distinguished with the UroMentor. Subjective assessments suggest ongoing refinement of the simulator as a learning tool for cystoscopic skills training.",
keywords = "computer simulation, cystoscopy, education, educational technology, manikins",
author = "Gettman, {Matthew T.} and Le, {Carter Q.} and Rangel, {Laureano J.} and Slezak, {Jeffrey M.} and Bergstralh, {Eric J.} and Amy Krambeck",
year = "2008",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.146",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "179",
pages = "267--271",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analysis of a Computer Based Simulator as an Educational Tool for Cystoscopy

T2 - Subjective and Objective Results

AU - Gettman, Matthew T.

AU - Le, Carter Q.

AU - Rangel, Laureano J.

AU - Slezak, Jeffrey M.

AU - Bergstralh, Eric J.

AU - Krambeck, Amy

PY - 2008/1

Y1 - 2008/1

N2 - Purpose: Resident education in cystoscopy has traditionally relied on clinical instruction. However, simulators are now available outside the clinical setting. We evaluated a simulator for flexible and rigid cystoscopy. Materials and Methods: We evaluated 30 novice and 27 expert cystoscopists on a computer based cystoscopic simulator (UroMentor, Simbionix, Lod, Israel). All subjects performed 5 trials of 3 basic cystoscopic tasks. The objective measurement was procedure time, and subjective measures were assessment of the simulator and individual tasks by the cystoscopist. Repeated measures analyses were performed using mixed effects regression models. Results: There was a significant difference in median age between novice and expert cystoscopists at 46 (range 25 to 63) and 35 (range 28 to 68) years old, respectively (p = 0.014). Experts completed simulations significantly faster than novices in all trials. For the first trial median times (novice vs expert) were 300 vs 68 seconds (p <0.001) for guide wire placement, 650 vs 179 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder examination and 119 vs 71 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder lesion fulguration. At the fifth trial median times (novice vs expert) were 57 vs 31 seconds (p = 0.001) for guide wire placement, 164 vs 67 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder examination and 55 vs 40 seconds (p = 0.007) for bladder lesion fulguration. Subjective task evaluations were lower in novice subjects but improved after training. Subjective simulator evaluations were more favorable in novice subjects. Conclusions: Objectively, expert and novice performance of cystoscopic tasks can be distinguished with the UroMentor. Subjective assessments suggest ongoing refinement of the simulator as a learning tool for cystoscopic skills training.

AB - Purpose: Resident education in cystoscopy has traditionally relied on clinical instruction. However, simulators are now available outside the clinical setting. We evaluated a simulator for flexible and rigid cystoscopy. Materials and Methods: We evaluated 30 novice and 27 expert cystoscopists on a computer based cystoscopic simulator (UroMentor, Simbionix, Lod, Israel). All subjects performed 5 trials of 3 basic cystoscopic tasks. The objective measurement was procedure time, and subjective measures were assessment of the simulator and individual tasks by the cystoscopist. Repeated measures analyses were performed using mixed effects regression models. Results: There was a significant difference in median age between novice and expert cystoscopists at 46 (range 25 to 63) and 35 (range 28 to 68) years old, respectively (p = 0.014). Experts completed simulations significantly faster than novices in all trials. For the first trial median times (novice vs expert) were 300 vs 68 seconds (p <0.001) for guide wire placement, 650 vs 179 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder examination and 119 vs 71 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder lesion fulguration. At the fifth trial median times (novice vs expert) were 57 vs 31 seconds (p = 0.001) for guide wire placement, 164 vs 67 seconds (p <0.001) for bladder examination and 55 vs 40 seconds (p = 0.007) for bladder lesion fulguration. Subjective task evaluations were lower in novice subjects but improved after training. Subjective simulator evaluations were more favorable in novice subjects. Conclusions: Objectively, expert and novice performance of cystoscopic tasks can be distinguished with the UroMentor. Subjective assessments suggest ongoing refinement of the simulator as a learning tool for cystoscopic skills training.

KW - computer simulation

KW - cystoscopy

KW - education

KW - educational technology

KW - manikins

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=36749034933&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=36749034933&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.146

DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.146

M3 - Article

C2 - 18001785

AN - SCOPUS:36749034933

VL - 179

SP - 267

EP - 271

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 1

ER -