Faculty Bibliography

The Robotic Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (R-OSATS) is a previously validated assessment tool that is used to assess 5 standardized inanimate robotic surgery drills. R-OSATS is used to evaluate performance on surgical drills, with scores of 0 to 20 for each drill. Our objective was to establish the minimum threshold score that denotes competence on these drills. Thus, we performed a standard setting study using data from surgeons and trainees in 8 academic medical centers. Cutoff scores for the minimal level of competence using R-OSATS were established using 2 techniques: the modified Angoff and the contrasting groups methods. For the modified Angoff method, 8 content experts met and, in an iterative process, derived the scores that a minimally competent trainee should receive. After 2 iterative rounds of scoring and discussion with the modified Angoff method, we established a minimum competence score per drill with high agreement (rWG range, 0.92-0.98). There was unanimous consensus that a trainee needs to achieve competence on each independent drill. A second method, the contrasting groups method, was used to verify our results. In this method, we compared R-OSATS scores from "inexperienced" (34 postgraduate year 1 and 2 trainees) with "experienced" (22 faculty and fellow) robotic surgeons. The distributions of scores from both groups were plotted, and a cutoff score for each drill was determined from the intersection of the 2 curves. Using this method, the minimum score for competence would be 14 per drill, which is slightly more stringent but confirms the results obtained from the modified Angoff approach. In conclusion, using 2 well-described standard setting techniques, we have established minimum benchmarks designating trainee competence for 5 dry lab robotic surgery drills.

OBJECTIVE:To develop a teaching and assessment tool for laparoscopic suturing and intracorporeal knot tying. DESIGN AND SETTING/METHODS:We designed an Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) tool that includes a procedure-specific checklist (PSC) and global rating scale (GRS) to assess laparoscopic suturing and intracorporeal knot-tying performance. Obstetrics and Gynecology residents at our institution were videotaped while performing a laparoscopic suturing and intracorporeal knot-tying task at a surgical simulation workshop. A total of 2 expert reviewers assessed resident performance using the OSATS tool during live performance and 1 month later using the videotaped recordings. OSATS scores were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Data are presented as median scores (interquartile range [IQR]). Intrarater and interrater reliabilities were assessed using a Spearman correlation and are presented as an r correlation coefficient and p value. An r ≥ 0.8 was considered as a high correlation. After testing, we received feedback from residents and faculty to improve the OSATS tool as part of an iterative design process. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:In all, 14 of 21 residents (66.7%) completed the study, with 9 junior residents and 5 senior residents. RESULTS:Junior residents had a lower score on the PSC than senior residents did; however, this was not statistically significant (median = 6.0 [IQR: 4.0-10.0] and median = 13.0 [IQR: 10.0-13.0]; p = 0.09). There was excellent intrarater reliability with our OSATS tool (for PSC component, r = 0.88 for Rater 1 and 0.93 for Rater 2, both p < 0.0001; for GRS component, r = 0.85 for Rater 1 and 0.88 for Rater 2, both p ≤ 0.0002). The PSC also has high interrater reliability during live evaluation (r = 0.92; p < 0.0001), and during the videotape scoring with r = 0.77 (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Our OSATS tool may be a useful assessment and teaching tool for laparoscopic suturing and intracorporeal knot-tying skills. Overall, good intrarater reliability was demonstrated, suggesting that this tool may be useful for longitudinal assessment of surgical skills.

OBJECTIVE:To compare risks and benefits of laparoscopic hysterectomy with morcellation versus abdominal hysterectomy without morcellation for large fibroids. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:We developed a shared clinical decision tool to communicate risks and benefits of laparoscopic versus abdominal hysterectomy to patients with large fibroids as mandated by the FDA. The decision tool was designed to serve as a framework for providers to counsel patients about mode of hysterectomy to facilitate shared decision-making between patient and provider. Risks and benefits were estimated from the literature, including surgical complications (venous thromboembolism, small bowel obstruction, adhesions, hernia, surgical site infections, and transfusions), uterine sarcoma risks, and quality-of-life endpoints. The shared clinical decision tool was applied to a hypothetical population of 20,000 patients with large uterine fibroids, of which 10,000 underwent laparoscopic hysterectomies and 10,000 had abdominal hysterectomies. RESULTS:Abdominal hysterectomy would result in 50.1% more adhesions, 10.7% more hernias, 4.8% more surgical site infections, 2.8% more bowel obstructions, and 2% more venous thromboembolisms compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy. Abdominal hysterectomy would also result in longer hospital stays (2 days), slower return to work (13.6 days), greater postoperative day 3 narcotic requirements (48%), and lower SF-36 quality-of-life scores (50.4 points lower). 0.28% of fibroid hysterectomy patients would have unsuspected uterine sarcomas. Among these patients, laparoscopic hysterectomy with morcellation would have a 27% reduction in 5-year overall survival rates and a 28.8 month shorter recurrence-free survival period. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Some evidence suggests laparoscopic hysterectomy with morcellation may result in increased risk of cancer dissemination with worse survival outcomes among uterine sarcoma patients compared to abdominal hysterectomy without morcellation, however, the current data is limited and the exact risks associated specifically with electromechanical morcellation are not conclusive. Data also supports abdominal hysterectomy would lead to a net detriment in other outcomes, with greater risks of venous thromboembolism, obstruction, hernia, adhesions, infection, and blood loss compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy. This shared clinical decision tool may aid the patient and physician in determining an optimal mode of hysterectomy for large uterine fibroids while taking account of risks and benefits as mandated by the FDA.

OBJECTIVE:Objective Structured Assessments of Technical Skills have been developed to measure the skill of surgical trainees. Our aim was to develop an Objective Structured Assessments of Technical Skills specifically for trainees learning robotic surgery. METHODS:This is a multiinstitutional study conducted in eight academic training programs. We created an assessment form to evaluate robotic surgical skill through five inanimate exercises. Gynecology, general surgery, and urology residents, Fellows, and faculty completed five robotic exercises on a standard training model. Study sessions were recorded and randomly assigned to three blinded judges who scored performance using the assessment form. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing scores between participants with different levels of surgical experience; interrater and intrarater reliability were also assessed. RESULTS:We evaluated 83 residents, nine Fellows, and 13 faculty totaling 105 participants; 88 (84%) were from gynecology. Our assessment form demonstrated construct validity with faculty and Fellows performing significantly better than residents (mean scores 89±8 faculty, 74±17 Fellows, 59±22 residents; P<.01). In addition, participants with more robotic console experience scored significantly higher than those with fewer prior console surgeries (P<.01). Robotic Objective Structured Assessments of Technical Skills demonstrated good interrater reliability across all five drills (mean Cronbach's α 0.79±0.02). Intrarater reliability was also high (mean Spearman's correlation 0.91±0.11). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:We developed a valid and reliable assessment form for robotic surgical skill. When paired with standardized robotic skill drills, this form may be useful to distinguish between levels of trainee performance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:II.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Effective application of electrosurgical techniques requires knowledge of energy sources and electric circuits to produce desired tissue effects. A lack of electrosurgery knowledge may negatively affect patient outcomes and safety. Our objective was to survey obstetrics-gynecology trainees and faculty to assess their basic knowledge of electrosurgery concepts as a needs assessment for formal electrosurgery training. METHODS:We performed an observational study with a sample of convenience at 2 academic hospitals (Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Mount Auburn Hospital). Grand rounds dedicated to electrosurgery teaching were conducted at each department of obstetrics and gynecology, where a short electrosurgery multiple-choice examination was administered to attendees. RESULTS:The face validity of the test content was obtained from a gynecologic electrosurgery specialist. Forty-four individuals completed the examination. Test scores were analyzed by level of training to investigate whether scores positively correlated with more advanced career stages. The median test score was 45.5% among all participants (interquartile range, 36.4%-54.5%). Senior residents scored the highest (median score, 54.5%), followed by attendings (median score, 45.5%), junior residents and fellows (median score in both groups, 36.4%), and medical students (median score, 27.3%). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Although surgeons have used electrosurgery for nearly a century, it remains poorly understood by most obstetrician-gynecologists. Senior residents, attendings, junior residents, and medical students all show a general deficiency in electrosurgery comprehension. This study suggests that there is a need for formal electrosurgery training. A standardized electrosurgery curriculum with a workshop component demonstrating clinically useful concepts essential for safe surgical practice is advised.

OBJECTIVE:To update the incidence of vaginal cuff dehiscence after different modes of hysterectomy and to describe surgical and patient characteristics of dehiscence complications. METHODS:This was an observational cohort study at a large academic hospital. All women who underwent hysterectomy and dehiscence repair between January 2006 and December 2009 were identified. Data from this study period were analyzed separately and in combination with our preliminary study (January 2000 to December 2005) for a 10-year analysis (January 2000 to December 2009). The primary outcome was incidence of vaginal cuff dehiscence after total laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with abdominal, vaginal, and laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH). RESULTS:Between 2006 and 2009, the overall incidence of dehiscence was 0.39% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-0.56). The incidence after total laparoscopic hysterectomy was 0.75% (95% CI 0.09-1.4), which was the highest among all modes of hysterectomy (LAVH was 0.46% [95% CI 0.0-1.10]; total abdominal hysterectomy was 0.38% [95% CI 0.16-0.61]; and total vaginal hysterectomy was 0.11%, [95% CI 0.0-0.32]). This incidence was appreciably lower than previously reported (4.93% in 2007 publication, 2.76% readjusted calculation). The 10-year cumulative incidence of dehiscence after all modes of hysterectomy was 0.24% (95% CI 0.15-0.33) and 1.35% (95% CI 0.72-2.3) among total laparoscopic hysterectomies. During the 10-year study period, total laparoscopic hysterectomy-related dehiscence was significantly increased compared with other modes of hysterectomy, with a risk ratio of dehiscence after total laparoscopic hysterectomy of 9.1 (95% CI 4.1-20.3) compared with total abdominal hysterectomy, risk ratio of 17.2 (95% CI 3.9-75.9) compared with total vaginal hysterectomy, and risk ratio of 4.9 (95% CI 1.1-21.5) compared with LAVH. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Our updated 1.35% incidence of dehiscence after total laparoscopic hysterectomy is much lower than previously reported. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:II.

OBJECTIVE:To describe our experience with the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) program as a teaching and assessment tool for basic laparoscopic competency among gynecology residents. METHODS:A prospective observational study was conducted at a single academic institution. Before the FLS program was introduced, baseline FLS testing was offered to residents and gynecology division directors. Test scores were analyzed by training level and self-reported surgical experience. After implementing a minimally invasive gynecologic surgical curriculum, third-year residents were retested. RESULTS:The pass rates for baseline FLS skills testing were 0% for first-year residents, 50% for second-year residents, and 75% for third- and fourth-year residents. The pass rates for baseline cognitive testing were 60% for first- and second-year residents, 67% for third-year residents, and 40% for fourth-year residents. When comparing junior and senior residents, there was a significant difference in pass rates for the skills test (P=.007) but not the cognitive test (P=.068). Self-reported surgical experience strongly correlated with skills scores (r-value=0.97, P=.0048), but not cognitive scores (r-value=0.20, P=.6265). After implementing a curriculum, 100% of the third-year residents passed the skills test, and 92% passed the cognitive examination. CONCLUSIONS:The FLS skills test may be a valuable assessment tool for gynecology residents. The cognitive test may need further adaptation for applicability to gynecologists.

The Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound convened a panel of specialists from gynecology, radiology, and pathology to arrive at a consensus regarding the management of ovarian and other adnexal cysts imaged sonographically in asymptomatic women. The panel met in Chicago, Ill, on October 27-28, 2009, and drafted this consensus statement. The recommendations in this statement are based on analysis of current literature and common practice strategies, and are thought to represent a reasonable approach to asymptomatic ovarian and other adnexal cysts imaged at ultrasonography.

BACKGROUND:This study was designed to investigate the validity of using the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) program to assess laparoscopic competence among gynecologists. METHODS:A total of 42 gynecologists with variable surgical training and laparoscopic experience were enrolled for FLS testing which includes a computer-based cognitive examination to assess one's knowledge and a psychomotor portion for manual skills assessment. Prior to testing, participants were surveyed to document their level of surgical training and caseload for common laparoscopic procedures. Participants were required to self-evaluate their confidence in conducting laparoscopic procedures. Upon completion of the FLS test, feedback was collected regarding the use of the FLS program for training and assessing laparoscopic skills of gynecologists. RESULTS:Gynecologists with advanced levels of surgical training achieved higher scores in the FLS manual skills test than those with lower levels of training (P = 0.009). The cognitive test, however, failed to show an increased score with greater levels of surgical training (P = 0.457). Regression analyses revealed that a participant's laparoscopic expertise contributed significantly to one's FLS manual skills scores (P = 0.008) beyond surgical training level alone. In contrast, laparoscopic expertise did not reflect changes in the FLS cognitive scores significantly (P = 0.628). Self-reported confidence scores correlated well with FLS manual skills test scores (r = 0.54) but not with the cognitive scores (r = 0.16). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The manual skills test of the FLS program appropriately measures the level of a gynecologist's psychomotor skills. The FLS cognitive test does not discriminate between advanced and novice surgeons. Modifications of questions used in the cognitive test are necessary to allow better adaptability when applying the FLS program to gynecologists.

Hysteroscopic Essure sterilizations offer women and physicians another option for contraception. Overall, the procedure is simple to perform and highly efficacious, and as a result, has gained popularity among practicing gynecologists. Unfortunately, complications occur with any type of surgery. We report 3 cases of hysteroscopic Essure sterilization complications where the Essure microinsert was noted to be misplaced or where patients had persistent postprocedure pain in the setting of appropriately placed microinserts. In all 3 cases, the microinserts were successfully removed laparoscopically.