Transfer and priming of surgical skills across minimally invasive surgical platforms

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) uses 3-dimensional visualization and wristed instruments that provide more degrees of freedom than rigid traditional laparoscopic (TLS) instrumentation. These features have been touted to improve accuracy and efficiency during surgical task performance. Lit...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Journal of surgical research Vol. 206; no. 1; pp. 48 - 52
Main Authors Zihni, Ahmed, Ge, Tianjia, Ray, Shuddhadeb, Wang, Robert, Liang, Zhe, Cavallo, Jaime A., Awad, Michael M.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Elsevier Inc 01.11.2016
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0022-4804
1095-8673
DOI10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026

Cover

Abstract Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) uses 3-dimensional visualization and wristed instruments that provide more degrees of freedom than rigid traditional laparoscopic (TLS) instrumentation. These features have been touted to improve accuracy and efficiency during surgical task performance. Little is known, however, about the transferability of skills between the two platforms or whether task performance on one platform primes surgeons for task performance on the other. Twenty-six subjects naïve to RALS were recruited to perform three Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery tasks on both TLS and RALS platforms: peg transfer, pattern cutting (PC), and intracorporeal suturing. All tasks were performed within Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery testing parameters and repeated three times by each subject on each platform. Platform and task order were randomized. Errors in task performance were defined as drops in the peg transfer task, faults 5 mm or more from the defined pattern during PC, and faults greater than 1 mm in suture placement from the defined points in intracorporeal suturing. Mean completion times and mean errors per trial (EPT) were calculated for each task on both platforms. Results were compared between those who performed TLS first (LF) and those who performed RALS first (RF) using unpaired Student's t-test (P < 0.05 considered statistically significant). No statistically significant differences in task completion time were noted between the LF and RF groups. RF subjects had fewer errors during robotic PC than LF subjects (1.02 EPT versus 1.86 EPT, respectively; P = 0.02). No other differences in task quality were noted. In surgeon's naïve to RALS, there is no evidence that skills acquired on RALS or TLS platforms are transferable to the other platform or that performing tasks on one platform primes a subject for task performance on the other. Performing TLS PC may have had a negative impact on subsequent RALS PC performance. These findings suggest that distinct programs for skills acquisition are necessary for both the TLS and RALS platforms.
AbstractList Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) uses 3-dimensional visualization and wristed instruments that provide more degrees of freedom than rigid traditional laparoscopic (TLS) instrumentation. These features have been touted to improve accuracy and efficiency during surgical task performance. Little is known, however, about the transferability of skills between the two platforms or whether task performance on one platform primes surgeons for task performance on the other. Twenty-six subjects naïve to RALS were recruited to perform three Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery tasks on both TLS and RALS platforms: peg transfer, pattern cutting (PC), and intracorporeal suturing. All tasks were performed within Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery testing parameters and repeated three times by each subject on each platform. Platform and task order were randomized. Errors in task performance were defined as drops in the peg transfer task, faults 5 mm or more from the defined pattern during PC, and faults greater than 1 mm in suture placement from the defined points in intracorporeal suturing. Mean completion times and mean errors per trial (EPT) were calculated for each task on both platforms. Results were compared between those who performed TLS first (LF) and those who performed RALS first (RF) using unpaired Student's t-test (P < 0.05 considered statistically significant). No statistically significant differences in task completion time were noted between the LF and RF groups. RF subjects had fewer errors during robotic PC than LF subjects (1.02 EPT versus 1.86 EPT, respectively; P = 0.02). No other differences in task quality were noted. In surgeon's naïve to RALS, there is no evidence that skills acquired on RALS or TLS platforms are transferable to the other platform or that performing tasks on one platform primes a subject for task performance on the other. Performing TLS PC may have had a negative impact on subsequent RALS PC performance. These findings suggest that distinct programs for skills acquisition are necessary for both the TLS and RALS platforms.
Abstract Background Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) uses 3-dimensional visualization and wristed instruments that provide more degrees of freedom than rigid traditional laparoscopic (TLS) instrumentation. These features have been touted to improve accuracy and efficiency during surgical task performance. Little is known, however, about the transferability of skills between the two platforms or whether task performance on one platform primes surgeons for task performance on the other. Methods Twenty-six subjects naïve to RALS were recruited to perform three Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery tasks on both TLS and RALS platforms: peg transfer, pattern cutting (PC), and intracorporeal suturing. All tasks were performed within Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery testing parameters and repeated three times by each subject on each platform. Platform and task order were randomized. Errors in task performance were defined as drops in the peg transfer task, faults 5 mm or more from the defined pattern during PC, and faults greater than 1 mm in suture placement from the defined points in intracorporeal suturing. Mean completion times and mean errors per trial (EPT) were calculated for each task on both platforms. Results were compared between those who performed TLS first (LF) and those who performed RALS first (RF) using unpaired Student's t -test ( P  < 0.05 considered statistically significant). Results No statistically significant differences in task completion time were noted between the LF and RF groups. RF subjects had fewer errors during robotic PC than LF subjects (1.02 EPT versus 1.86 EPT, respectively; P  = 0.02). No other differences in task quality were noted. Conclusions In surgeon's naïve to RALS, there is no evidence that skills acquired on RALS or TLS platforms are transferable to the other platform or that performing tasks on one platform primes a subject for task performance on the other. Performing TLS PC may have had a negative impact on subsequent RALS PC performance. These findings suggest that distinct programs for skills acquisition are necessary for both the TLS and RALS platforms.
BACKGROUNDRobot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) uses 3-dimensional visualization and wristed instruments that provide more degrees of freedom than rigid traditional laparoscopic (TLS) instrumentation. These features have been touted to improve accuracy and efficiency during surgical task performance. Little is known, however, about the transferability of skills between the two platforms or whether task performance on one platform primes surgeons for task performance on the other.METHODSTwenty-six subjects naïve to RALS were recruited to perform three Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery tasks on both TLS and RALS platforms: peg transfer, pattern cutting (PC), and intracorporeal suturing. All tasks were performed within Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery testing parameters and repeated three times by each subject on each platform. Platform and task order were randomized. Errors in task performance were defined as drops in the peg transfer task, faults 5 mm or more from the defined pattern during PC, and faults greater than 1 mm in suture placement from the defined points in intracorporeal suturing. Mean completion times and mean errors per trial (EPT) were calculated for each task on both platforms. Results were compared between those who performed TLS first (LF) and those who performed RALS first (RF) using unpaired Student's t-test (P < 0.05 considered statistically significant).RESULTSNo statistically significant differences in task completion time were noted between the LF and RF groups. RF subjects had fewer errors during robotic PC than LF subjects (1.02 EPT versus 1.86 EPT, respectively; P = 0.02). No other differences in task quality were noted.CONCLUSIONSIn surgeon's naïve to RALS, there is no evidence that skills acquired on RALS or TLS platforms are transferable to the other platform or that performing tasks on one platform primes a subject for task performance on the other. Performing TLS PC may have had a negative impact on subsequent RALS PC performance. These findings suggest that distinct programs for skills acquisition are necessary for both the TLS and RALS platforms.
Author Zihni, Ahmed
Ray, Shuddhadeb
Wang, Robert
Cavallo, Jaime A.
Liang, Zhe
Ge, Tianjia
Awad, Michael M.
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Ahmed
  surname: Zihni
  fullname: Zihni, Ahmed
  email: zihnia@wudosis.wustl.edu
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Tianjia
  orcidid: 0000-0002-3618-3051
  surname: Ge
  fullname: Ge, Tianjia
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Shuddhadeb
  surname: Ray
  fullname: Ray, Shuddhadeb
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Robert
  surname: Wang
  fullname: Wang, Robert
– sequence: 5
  givenname: Zhe
  surname: Liang
  fullname: Liang, Zhe
– sequence: 6
  givenname: Jaime A.
  surname: Cavallo
  fullname: Cavallo, Jaime A.
– sequence: 7
  givenname: Michael M.
  surname: Awad
  fullname: Awad, Michael M.
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27916374$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNqFUk1r3DAQFSWl2Wz7A3opPvbirb5syxQKJfQLAj10exayPA5yZGmrsRf231fuJhQCTWFAI_Te08ybuSIXIQYg5DWjO0ZZ_W7cjYg7ntMdzcHrZ2TDaFuVqm7EBdlQynkpFZWX5ApxpPneNuIFueRNy2rRyA3Z75MJOEAqTOiLQ3KTC7dFHApc0q2zxhd457zHwtgUEYv87Cbj_alw4WjQHeEv8uDNPMQ04UvyfDAe4dX9uSU_P3_aX38tb75_-Xb98aa0FVdzaZWqezZ0QsimEowbA1XOQXSG5fp4LZTsJe2GRjW2FhSUsZVSlvatbPu2E1vy9qx7SPHXAjjryaEF702AuKBmStaUS9XSDH1zD126CXq9dmrSST84kQHNGfCnzwSDtm42s4thTsZ5zahePdejzp7r1XNNc-Qit4Q9Yj6IP8V5f-ZAtufoIGm0DoKF3iWws-6je5L94RHb-jyXPIM7OAGOcUkh-66ZRq6p_rHuwboGuVPKZLO60f5b4D-f_wYiYMGt
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1007_s00464_023_10472_5
crossref_primary_10_3138_jvme_2022_0130
crossref_primary_10_1007_s00464_019_07243_6
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jsurg_2023_08_014
crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_022_01492_9
crossref_primary_10_1007_s11695_019_03748_0
crossref_primary_10_1002_wjs_12008
crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_023_01757_x
Cites_doi 10.1016/j.suc.2010.02.012
10.1007/s00464-008-9805-3
10.1007/s00464-010-1512-1
10.1089/end.2012.0633
10.1016/S0090-4295(02)01717-X
10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.09.016
10.1007/s00383-011-3045-7
10.1007/s00464-002-8938-z
10.1007/s00464-014-3497-7
10.1001/archsurg.133.9.957
10.1016/j.jss.2013.10.014
10.1016/j.surg.2009.11.002
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright 2016 Elsevier Inc.
Elsevier Inc.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright_xml – notice: 2016 Elsevier Inc.
– notice: Elsevier Inc.
– notice: Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
DBID AAYXX
CITATION
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
7X8
DOI 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026
DatabaseName CrossRef
Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList MEDLINE


MEDLINE - Academic

Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: EIF
  name: MEDLINE
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search
  sourceTypes: Index Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
EISSN 1095-8673
EndPage 52
ExternalDocumentID 27916374
10_1016_j_jss_2016_06_026
S0022480416301470
1_s2_0_S0022480416301470
Genre Clinical Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Journal Article
GroupedDBID ---
--K
--M
.1-
.55
.FO
.GJ
.~1
0R~
1B1
1P~
1RT
1~.
1~5
29L
3O-
4.4
457
4CK
4G.
53G
5GY
5RE
5VS
7-5
71M
8P~
9JM
AABNK
AAEDT
AAEDW
AAIKJ
AAKOC
AALRI
AAOAW
AAQFI
AAQXK
AATTM
AAXKI
AAXUO
AAYWO
ABBQC
ABFNM
ABJNI
ABMAC
ABMZM
ABWVN
ABXDB
ACDAQ
ACGFS
ACIEU
ACRLP
ACRPL
ACVFH
ADBBV
ADCNI
ADEZE
ADFGL
ADMUD
ADNMO
AEBSH
AEIPS
AEKER
AENEX
AEUPX
AEVXI
AFFNX
AFJKZ
AFPUW
AFRHN
AFTJW
AFXIZ
AGCQF
AGHFR
AGQPQ
AGUBO
AGYEJ
AHHHB
AIEXJ
AIGII
AIIUN
AIKHN
AITUG
AJRQY
AJUYK
AKBMS
AKRWK
AKYEP
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AMRAJ
ANKPU
ANZVX
APXCP
ASPBG
AVWKF
AXJTR
AZFZN
BKOJK
BLXMC
BNPGV
CAG
COF
CS3
DM4
DU5
EBS
EFBJH
EFKBS
EJD
EO8
EO9
EP2
EP3
F5P
FDB
FEDTE
FGOYB
FIRID
FNPLU
FYGXN
G-2
G-Q
GBLVA
HEK
HMK
HMO
HVGLF
HZ~
IHE
J1W
J5H
KOM
LG5
M29
M41
MO0
N9A
O-L
O9-
OAUVE
OK-
OW-
OZT
P-8
P-9
P2P
PC.
Q38
R2-
ROL
RPZ
SAE
SCC
SDF
SDG
SDP
SEL
SES
SEW
SPCBC
SSH
SSZ
T5K
UHS
WUQ
X7M
XPP
Z5R
ZGI
ZMT
ZU3
ZXP
~G-
AACTN
AFCTW
AFKWA
AJOXV
AMFUW
PKN
RIG
AAYXX
AGRNS
CITATION
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
7X8
EFLBG
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c528t-c886d1fb33475312aae5334e3ba191626384d40bf787c630e8ac588c0d949d9b3
IEDL.DBID AIKHN
ISSN 0022-4804
IngestDate Fri Sep 05 12:43:29 EDT 2025
Wed Feb 19 02:43:15 EST 2025
Tue Jul 01 04:05:37 EDT 2025
Thu Apr 24 23:12:15 EDT 2025
Sun Apr 06 06:53:08 EDT 2025
Tue Feb 25 20:00:30 EST 2025
Tue Aug 26 16:45:23 EDT 2025
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 1
Keywords Laparoscopic surgery
Surgical task performance
Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery
Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery
Language English
License Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c528t-c886d1fb33475312aae5334e3ba191626384d40bf787c630e8ac588c0d949d9b3
Notes ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ORCID 0000-0002-3618-3051
PMID 27916374
PQID 1846024890
PQPubID 23479
PageCount 5
ParticipantIDs proquest_miscellaneous_1846024890
pubmed_primary_27916374
crossref_citationtrail_10_1016_j_jss_2016_06_026
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jss_2016_06_026
elsevier_sciencedirect_doi_10_1016_j_jss_2016_06_026
elsevier_clinicalkeyesjournals_1_s2_0_S0022480416301470
elsevier_clinicalkey_doi_10_1016_j_jss_2016_06_026
ProviderPackageCode CITATION
AAYXX
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2016-11-01
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2016-11-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 11
  year: 2016
  text: 2016-11-01
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2010
PublicationPlace United States
PublicationPlace_xml – name: United States
PublicationTitle The Journal of surgical research
PublicationTitleAlternate J Surg Res
PublicationYear 2016
Publisher Elsevier Inc
Publisher_xml – name: Elsevier Inc
References Lin, Romanelli, Kuhn, Thompson, Bush, Seymour (bib3) 2009; 23
Dakin, Gagner (bib10) 2003; 17
Zihni, Ohu, Cavallo, Ousley, Cho, Awad (bib8) 2014; 28
Garcia-Ruiz, Gagner, Miller, Steiner, Hahn (bib2) 1998; 133
Vassiliou, Dunkin, Marks, Fried (bib13) 2010; 90
Menhadji, Abdelshehid, Osann (bib4) 2013; 27
Yohannes, Rotariu, Pinto, Smith, Lee (bib7) 2002; 60
Guru, Kuvshinoff, Pavlov-Shapiro (bib11) 2007; 204
Stefanidis, Hope, Scott (bib12) 2011; 25
Panait, Shetty, Shewokis, Sanchez (bib6) 2014; 187
Chandra, Nehra, Parent (bib9) 2010; 147
Amodeo, Linares Quevedo, Joseph, Belgrano, Patel (bib1) 2009; 61
Krauss, Neumuth, Wachowiak (bib5) 2012; 28
Vassiliou (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib13) 2010; 90
Amodeo (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib1) 2009; 61
Yohannes (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib7) 2002; 60
Lin (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib3) 2009; 23
Stefanidis (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib12) 2011; 25
Panait (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib6) 2014; 187
Krauss (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib5) 2012; 28
Guru (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib11) 2007; 204
Zihni (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib8) 2014; 28
Chandra (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib9) 2010; 147
Garcia-Ruiz (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib2) 1998; 133
Dakin (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib10) 2003; 17
Menhadji (10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib4) 2013; 27
References_xml – volume: 23
  start-page: 209
  year: 2009
  end-page: 214
  ident: bib3
  article-title: Computer-based laparoscopic and robotic surgical simulators: performance characteristics and perceptions of new users
  publication-title: Surg Endosc
– volume: 61
  start-page: 121
  year: 2009
  end-page: 128
  ident: bib1
  article-title: Robotic laparoscopic surgery: cost and training
  publication-title: Minerva Urol Nefrol
– volume: 17
  start-page: 574
  year: 2003
  end-page: 579
  ident: bib10
  article-title: Comparison of laparoscopic skills performance between standard instruments and two surgical robotic systems
  publication-title: Surg Endosc
– volume: 28
  start-page: 357
  year: 2012
  end-page: 362
  ident: bib5
  article-title: Laparoscopic versus robot-assisted Nissen fundoplication in an infant pig model
  publication-title: Pediatr Surg Int
– volume: 60
  start-page: 39
  year: 2002
  end-page: 45
  ident: bib7
  article-title: Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic skills: is there a difference in the learning curve?
  publication-title: Urology
– volume: 90
  start-page: 535
  year: 2010
  end-page: 558
  ident: bib13
  article-title: FLS and FES: comprehensive models of training and assessment
  publication-title: Surg Clin North Am
– volume: 27
  start-page: 783
  year: 2013
  end-page: 789
  ident: bib4
  article-title: Tracking and assessment of technical skills acquisition among urology residents for open, laparoscopic, and robotic skills over 4 years: is there a trend?
  publication-title: J Endourol
– volume: 25
  start-page: 2141
  year: 2011
  end-page: 2146
  ident: bib12
  article-title: Robotic suturing on the FLS model possesses construct validity, is less physically demanding, and is favored by more surgeons compared with laparoscopy
  publication-title: Surg Endosc
– volume: 204
  start-page: 96
  year: 2007
  end-page: 101
  ident: bib11
  article-title: Impact of robotics and laparoscopy on surgical skills: a comparative study
  publication-title: J Am Coll Surg
– volume: 28
  start-page: 2459
  year: 2014
  end-page: 2465
  ident: bib8
  article-title: FLS tasks can be used as an ergonomic discriminator between laparoscopic and robotic surgery
  publication-title: Surg Endosc
– volume: 133
  start-page: 957
  year: 1998
  end-page: 961
  ident: bib2
  article-title: Manual vs robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of basic manipulation and suturing tasks
  publication-title: Arch Surg
– volume: 187
  start-page: 53
  year: 2014
  end-page: 58
  ident: bib6
  article-title: Do laparoscopic skills transfer to robotic surgery?
  publication-title: J Surg Res
– volume: 147
  start-page: 830
  year: 2010
  end-page: 839
  ident: bib9
  article-title: A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic assisted suturing performance by experts and novices
  publication-title: Surgery
– volume: 90
  start-page: 535
  year: 2010
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib13
  article-title: FLS and FES: comprehensive models of training and assessment
  publication-title: Surg Clin North Am
  doi: 10.1016/j.suc.2010.02.012
– volume: 23
  start-page: 209
  year: 2009
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib3
  article-title: Computer-based laparoscopic and robotic surgical simulators: performance characteristics and perceptions of new users
  publication-title: Surg Endosc
  doi: 10.1007/s00464-008-9805-3
– volume: 25
  start-page: 2141
  year: 2011
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib12
  article-title: Robotic suturing on the FLS model possesses construct validity, is less physically demanding, and is favored by more surgeons compared with laparoscopy
  publication-title: Surg Endosc
  doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1512-1
– volume: 27
  start-page: 783
  year: 2013
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib4
  article-title: Tracking and assessment of technical skills acquisition among urology residents for open, laparoscopic, and robotic skills over 4 years: is there a trend?
  publication-title: J Endourol
  doi: 10.1089/end.2012.0633
– volume: 60
  start-page: 39
  year: 2002
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib7
  article-title: Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic skills: is there a difference in the learning curve?
  publication-title: Urology
  doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(02)01717-X
– volume: 204
  start-page: 96
  year: 2007
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib11
  article-title: Impact of robotics and laparoscopy on surgical skills: a comparative study
  publication-title: J Am Coll Surg
  doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.09.016
– volume: 28
  start-page: 357
  year: 2012
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib5
  article-title: Laparoscopic versus robot-assisted Nissen fundoplication in an infant pig model
  publication-title: Pediatr Surg Int
  doi: 10.1007/s00383-011-3045-7
– volume: 17
  start-page: 574
  year: 2003
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib10
  article-title: Comparison of laparoscopic skills performance between standard instruments and two surgical robotic systems
  publication-title: Surg Endosc
  doi: 10.1007/s00464-002-8938-z
– volume: 28
  start-page: 2459
  year: 2014
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib8
  article-title: FLS tasks can be used as an ergonomic discriminator between laparoscopic and robotic surgery
  publication-title: Surg Endosc
  doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3497-7
– volume: 133
  start-page: 957
  year: 1998
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib2
  article-title: Manual vs robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of basic manipulation and suturing tasks
  publication-title: Arch Surg
  doi: 10.1001/archsurg.133.9.957
– volume: 187
  start-page: 53
  year: 2014
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib6
  article-title: Do laparoscopic skills transfer to robotic surgery?
  publication-title: J Surg Res
  doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2013.10.014
– volume: 61
  start-page: 121
  year: 2009
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib1
  article-title: Robotic laparoscopic surgery: cost and training
  publication-title: Minerva Urol Nefrol
– volume: 147
  start-page: 830
  year: 2010
  ident: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026_bib9
  article-title: A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic assisted suturing performance by experts and novices
  publication-title: Surgery
  doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2009.11.002
SSID ssj0002973
Score 2.219472
Snippet Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) uses 3-dimensional visualization and wristed instruments that provide more degrees of freedom than rigid traditional...
Abstract Background Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) uses 3-dimensional visualization and wristed instruments that provide more degrees of freedom...
BACKGROUNDRobot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) uses 3-dimensional visualization and wristed instruments that provide more degrees of freedom than rigid...
SourceID proquest
pubmed
crossref
elsevier
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
Enrichment Source
Publisher
StartPage 48
SubjectTerms Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data
Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery
Humans
Laparoscopic surgery
Laparoscopy - instrumentation
Laparoscopy - methods
Laparoscopy - psychology
Learning Curve
Missouri
Pilot Projects
Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery
Robotic Surgical Procedures - instrumentation
Robotic Surgical Procedures - methods
Robotic Surgical Procedures - psychology
Surgery
Surgical task performance
Task Performance and Analysis
Title Transfer and priming of surgical skills across minimally invasive surgical platforms
URI https://www.clinicalkey.com/#!/content/1-s2.0-S0022480416301470
https://www.clinicalkey.es/playcontent/1-s2.0-S0022480416301470
https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.026
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27916374
https://www.proquest.com/docview/1846024890
Volume 206
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3da9swEBdd-tKXsbKuy9YWDfpU8GJbki09htCSbbRPDeRNyJI8knlOiJNBX_q3984fKaVZBnu00fns8-k-0N3vCLnMncicsiIQPIEEReQsyJSXQa5i51OwmIphc_LtXTKe8O9TMT0go64XBssqW9vf2PTaWrd3Bq00B8vZDHt8wf0gfE6CaUEKefthzFQieuRw-O3H-G5rkHE8UwcajgTd4WZd5jWvELQ7SmoUT4RY2O2e_hZ-1m7o5h1528aPdNi84jE58OV7cl97nNyvqCkdXdaTun7SRU6rzaq2bLT6NSuKipqaK0U8kd-mKB7orPxjsID9eeWyMGsMZKsTMrm5vh-Ng3ZcQmBFLNeBlTJxUZ4xxiEHiWJjPPbZepYZSMoQdUZyx8Mshz1qQWZeGiuktKFTXDmVsQ-kVy5K_5FQnqfg11WY2MhxwawMVeqtshDtWGdC0ydhJyVtWyxxHGlR6K5obK5BsBoFq7FwLk765GpLsmyANPYtjjvR665DFGyaBjO_jyjdReSrdldWOtJVrEP9SnP6hG8pXyjfvxh-6bRCw6bEkxZT-sUGGEFUh2BxCh592qjL9qPjFH4GS_mn_2P6mRzhVdMOeUZ669XGn0NctM4uyJuvj9FFq_1PnAkLAw
linkProvider Elsevier
linkToHtml http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1LS8NAEF6KHvQiiq_6XMGTEMxjk-weiyhV255a8LZsdjdSjWlpWsF_70weFfEFXpOdTDKZJzvzLSHnqQkTI3TohCyCAiVMAycRljup8I2NwWOKAIeT-4OoO2J3D-FDi1w1szDYVln7_sqnl966vnJZS_NyOh7jjC-EH4TPibAsiKFuX2XAEVR7tXN73x0sHTIez9SAhiNBs7lZtnk9FQja7UUliidCLHwfnn5KP8swdLNJNur8kXaqV9wiLZtvk2EZcVI7oyo3dFqe1PVIJyktFrPSs9HieZxlBVUlV4p4Ii8qy97oOH9V2MD-sXKaqTkmssUOGd1cD6-6Tn1cgqNDn88dzXlkvDQJAgY1iOcrZXHO1gaJgqIMUWc4M8xNUrBRDTKzXOmQc-0awYQRSbBLVvJJbvcJZWkMcV24kfYMCwPNXRFbLTRkO9ooV7WJ20hJ6hpLHI-0yGTTNPYkQbASBSuxcc6P2uRiSTKtgDR-W-w3opfNhCj4NAlu_jei-DsiW9RWWUhPFr505RfNaRO2pPykfH8xPGu0QoJR4k6Lyu1kAYwgq0OwOAGP3qvUZfnRfgw_I4jZwf-YnpK17rDfk73bwf0hWcc71WjkEVmZzxb2GHKkeXJS28A7AFgM8g
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Transfer+and+priming+of+surgical+skills+across+minimally+invasive+surgical+platforms&rft.jtitle=The+Journal+of+surgical+research&rft.au=Zihni%2C+Ahmed&rft.au=Ge%2C+Tianjia&rft.au=Ray%2C+Shuddhadeb&rft.au=Wang%2C+Robert&rft.date=2016-11-01&rft.eissn=1095-8673&rft.volume=206&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=48&rft.epage=52&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.jss.2016.06.026&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_m http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/image/custom?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.clinicalkey.com%2Fck-thumbnails%2F00224804%2FS0022480416X0011X%2Fcov150h.gif