Motion Capture as a Tool for the Assessment of Laparoscopic Performance

NCT04646304 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: 20200631-01H
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 26
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

The goal of this study is to 1) identify motion capture variables that can be used to differentiate surgical experience level and 2) evaluate if these variables can be used in a surgical education setting to improve resident performance.

Conditions

Healthy; Adult ALL

Keywords

surgical trainees; surgical staff

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (7)

• Completion time

  Time to complete each task measured in seconds

  1 year

• Instrument pathlength

  Pathlength of surgical instrument tip measured in cm

  1 year

• Motion smoothness

  Motion smoothness of surgical instrument tip measured by the number of changes in acceleration (m/s\^2)

  1 year

• Instrument orientation

  Orientation of surgical instrument tip measured in the three planes of motion (depth, pitch, roll, yaw), quantified in degrees relative to the surgical trainer box's local coordinate system.

  1 year

• Fundamentals of Laparoscopy Skill (FLS) score

  \- A numbered score is calculated following procedures outlined in the Fundamentals of Laparoscopy Skills (FLS) modules

  1 year

• Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) score

  \- A numbered score is computed from a global rating system based evaluation grid.

  1 year

• Participant classification

  Blinded reviews will classify participants as junior residents, senior residents, fellows/staff based on their perception of participant skill level.

  1 year

Secondary Outcomes (3)

• Muscle Electromyography

  1 year

• Muscle activation symmetry

  1 year

• Upper body kinematics

  1 year

Study Arms (2)

Objective Feedback (Motion Capture)

OTHER

Participants in the objective feedback group will receive a report that compares their performance in Set 1 to that of the staff surgeons' using the target interval as a reference. Participants receiving objective feedback will then complete Sets 2 and 3 knowing what factors to improve upon.

Other: Objective Feedback (Motion Capture)

No Feedback

NO INTERVENTION

Participants receiving no feedback will complete all sets with no intervention.

Interventions

Objective Feedback (Motion Capture) OTHER

Participants assigned to the objective feedback group will be given a report after completing Set 1 and Set 2. This report will outline their performance for each significant factor (identified in Phase 1) relative to a target interval, derived from the staff surgeon group average (± one standard deviation). Participants assigned to the objective feedback group will then be able to repeat the tasks knowing which variables to improve.

Objective Feedback (Motion Capture)

Eligibility Criteria

• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Child (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• staff surgeons, surgical fellows and residents
• primary affiliation with the departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Urology, General Surgery, and Thoracics at the University of Ottawa and The Ottawa Hospital

You may not qualify if:

• current injury/condition that in the opinion or the participant and/or research team will affect performance

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Ottawa Hospital Research Institute: lead

Study Sites (1)

Ottawa Hospital Research Institute

Ottawa, Ontario, K1G 7W9, Canada

Location

Related Publications (6)

• Sanchez A, Rodriguez O, Sanchez R, Benitez G, Pena R, Salamo O, Baez V. Laparoscopic surgery skills evaluation: analysis based on accelerometers. JSLS. 2014 Oct-Dec;18(4):e2014.00234. doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2014.00234.

  PMID: 25489218 BACKGROUND

• Moorthy, Munz, Dosis, Bello, Darzi. Motion analysis in the training and assessment of minimally invasive surgery. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2003 Jul;12(3):137-42. doi: 10.1080/13645700310011233.

  PMID: 16754092 BACKGROUND

• Farcas MA, Trudeau MO, Nasr A, Gerstle JT, Carrillo B, Azzie G. Analysis of motion in laparoscopy: the deconstruction of an intra-corporeal suturing task. Surg Endosc. 2017 Aug;31(8):3130-3139. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5337-4. Epub 2016 Dec 7.

  PMID: 27928669 BACKGROUND

• Gray RJ, Kahol K, Islam G, Smith M, Chapital A, Ferrara J. High-fidelity, low-cost, automated method to assess laparoscopic skills objectively. J Surg Educ. 2012 May-Jun;69(3):335-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2011.10.014.

  PMID: 22483134 BACKGROUND

• Ganni S, Botden SMBI, Chmarra M, Li M, Goossens RHM, Jakimowicz JJ. Validation of Motion Tracking Software for Evaluation of Surgical Performance in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. J Med Syst. 2020 Jan 24;44(3):56. doi: 10.1007/s10916-020-1525-9.

  PMID: 31980955 BACKGROUND

• Gallagher AG, McClure N, McGuigan J, Ritchie K, Sheehy NP. An ergonomic analysis of the fulcrum effect in the acquisition of endoscopic skills. Endoscopy. 1998 Sep;30(7):617-20. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1001366.

  PMID: 9826140 BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma

Interventions

Motion Capture

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Leukemia, Lymphoid; Leukemia; Neoplasms by Histologic Type; Neoplasms; Hematologic Diseases; Hemic and Lymphatic Diseases; Lymphoproliferative Disorders; Lymphatic Diseases; Immunoproliferative Disorders; Immune System Diseases

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Diagnostic Tests, Routine; Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures; Diagnosis; Investigative Techniques

Study Officials

• Sukhbir Singh

  Ottawa Hospital Research Institute

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: SEQUENTIAL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Model Details: Phase 1 will recruit 4 groups of participants that vary in surgical experience (junior residents, senior residents, surgical fellows, and staff surgeons). Significant differences in objective measures of surgical performance will be identified. A target interval will be computed for each significant factor based on the staff surgeons' average performance. Phase 2 will recruit junior residents to complete the same sets of surgical tasks. Half of the participants will receive objective feedback comparing their performance in Set 1 to the staff surgeons' target interval while the other half will receive no feedback. Differences in performance between Sets 1 and 3 will be quantified and compared between groups.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: November 3, 2020
• First Posted: November 27, 2020
• Study Start: May 1, 2021
• Primary Completion: October 11, 2023
• Study Completion: December 31, 2024
• Last Updated: March 25, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-03

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

CA (1)