Imperial College London
Portrait Picture

Professor Long R Jiao MD FRCS

Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgery & Cancer

Professor of Surgery
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 3313 3937l.jiao

 
 
//

Location

 

BN1/15 Area BHammersmith HospitalHammersmith Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Gall:2020:10.1002/bjs5.50353,
author = {Gall, TMH and Alrawashdeh, W and Soomro, N and White, S and Jiao, LR},
doi = {10.1002/bjs5.50353},
journal = {BJS Open},
pages = {1100--1108},
title = {Shortening surgical training through robotics: randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus robotic surgical learning curves.},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50353},
volume = {4},
year = {2020}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery is the standard technique for many operations. Laparoscopic training has a long learning curve. Robotic solutions may shorten the training pathway. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic with robotic training in surgical trainees and medical students. METHODS: Surgical trainees (ST group) were randomized to receive 6 h of robotic or laparoscopic simulation training. They then performed three surgical tasks in cadaveric specimens. Medical students (MS group) had 2 h of robotic or laparoscopic simulation training followed by one surgical task. The Global Rating Scale (GRS) score (maximum 30), number of suture errors, and time to complete each procedure were recorded. RESULTS: The median GRS score for the ST group was better for each procedure after robotic training compared with laparoscopic training (total GRS score: 27·00 (i.q.r. 22·25-28·33) versus 18·00 (16·50-19·04) respectively, P < 0·001; 10 participants in each arm). The ST group made fewer errors in robotic than in laparoscopic tasks, for both continuous (7·00 (4·75-9·63) versus 22·25 (20·75-25·25); P < 0·001) and interrupted (8·25 (6·38-10·13) versus 29·50 (23·75-31·50); P < 0·001) sutures. For the MS group, the robotic group completed 8·67 interrupted sutures with 15·50 errors in 40 min, compared with only 3·50 sutures with 40·00 errors in the laparoscopic group (P < 0·001) (10 participants in each arm). Fatigue and physical comfort levels were better after robotic compared with laparoscopic operating for both groups (P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: The acquisition of surgical skills in surgical trainees and the surgically naive takes less time with a robotic compared with a laparoscopic platform.
AU  - Gall,TMH
AU  - Alrawashdeh,W
AU  - Soomro,N
AU  - White,S
AU  - Jiao,LR
DO  - 10.1002/bjs5.50353
EP  - 1108
PY  - 2020///
SP  - 1100
TI  - Shortening surgical training through robotics: randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus robotic surgical learning curves.
T2  - BJS Open
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50353
UR  - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33052038
VL  - 4
ER  -
Download