Feedback differences between upper gastrointestinal and colorectal specialists observing laparoscopic trainee surgeon suturing videos

IF 1.4 Q3 SURGERY Surgery open science Pub Date : 2025-02-05 DOI:10.1016/j.sopen.2025.02.001
Daigo Kuboki , Teruhiko Unoki , Yuji Kaneda , Yoshitaka Maeda , Kosuke Oiwa , Hironori Yamaguchi , Naohiro Sata , Hiroshi Kawahira
{"title":"Feedback differences between upper gastrointestinal and colorectal specialists observing laparoscopic trainee surgeon suturing videos","authors":"Daigo Kuboki ,&nbsp;Teruhiko Unoki ,&nbsp;Yuji Kaneda ,&nbsp;Yoshitaka Maeda ,&nbsp;Kosuke Oiwa ,&nbsp;Hironori Yamaguchi ,&nbsp;Naohiro Sata ,&nbsp;Hiroshi Kawahira","doi":"10.1016/j.sopen.2025.02.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Performing laparoscopic suturing requires quality education. Differences in instruction according to trainer surgeon specialty could affect trainee skill acquisition. This study compares the focus of feedback between Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) specialists and Colorectal (CR) specialists.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A 13-year postgraduate trainee received online feedback for two laparoscopic suturing procedures videos of “low” and “high” difficulty from 16 surgeons (UGI = 8, CR = 8) who are specialists in laparoscopic surgery and qualified by the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System of the Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery. The number of feedback comments was compared between specialist groups for grasping the needle, needle driving, knot tying preparation, and knot tying. Both groups were also surveyed regarding suturing procedures.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The UGI group had significantly more feedback comment varieties for knot tying preparation during the “high” difficulty video (UGI 4.0 ± 2.1 (mean ± SD), CR 1.9 ± 1.4, p &lt; 0.05). According to questionnaire results, the UGI group performed suturing more routinely than the CR group, was more confident, and less stressed about the procedure.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In feedback for laparoscopic suturing videos, the UGI group focused more on the preparatory stage for knot tying than the CR group. This indicates that comment focus differs according to specialty, suggesting that instruction from trainers of multiple specialties is optimal.</div></div><div><h3>Key message</h3><div>In this study, it was shown that the focus of feedback on laparoscopic suturing procedures differs according to the surgeon's subspecialty. These insights could have important implications for optimizing laparoscopic training programs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74892,"journal":{"name":"Surgery open science","volume":"24 ","pages":"Pages 31-37"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery open science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589845025000107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Performing laparoscopic suturing requires quality education. Differences in instruction according to trainer surgeon specialty could affect trainee skill acquisition. This study compares the focus of feedback between Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) specialists and Colorectal (CR) specialists.

Methods

A 13-year postgraduate trainee received online feedback for two laparoscopic suturing procedures videos of “low” and “high” difficulty from 16 surgeons (UGI = 8, CR = 8) who are specialists in laparoscopic surgery and qualified by the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System of the Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery. The number of feedback comments was compared between specialist groups for grasping the needle, needle driving, knot tying preparation, and knot tying. Both groups were also surveyed regarding suturing procedures.

Results

The UGI group had significantly more feedback comment varieties for knot tying preparation during the “high” difficulty video (UGI 4.0 ± 2.1 (mean ± SD), CR 1.9 ± 1.4, p < 0.05). According to questionnaire results, the UGI group performed suturing more routinely than the CR group, was more confident, and less stressed about the procedure.

Conclusion

In feedback for laparoscopic suturing videos, the UGI group focused more on the preparatory stage for knot tying than the CR group. This indicates that comment focus differs according to specialty, suggesting that instruction from trainers of multiple specialties is optimal.

Key message

In this study, it was shown that the focus of feedback on laparoscopic suturing procedures differs according to the surgeon's subspecialty. These insights could have important implications for optimizing laparoscopic training programs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
66 days
期刊最新文献
Feedback differences between upper gastrointestinal and colorectal specialists observing laparoscopic trainee surgeon suturing videos Use of a microvascular anastomotic coupler device for kidney transplantation in rats Perceptions and attitudes of medical students toward opioid education: A qualitative study Innovative strategies in bile duct repair: Assessing efficacy and safety across varied graft techniques - A systematic review Propensity matched analysis of DPA or DPL used within the first hour for severely hypotensive blunt trauma patients
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1