Search

Background: Surgical training emphasizes technical competence. Growing evidence indicates that nontechnical skills are also significant in determining performance. Critically, surgeons should be aware how performance is affected by pressure or distraction. We assessed the impact of novel auditory and visual stressors on performance during a simulated laparoscopic task. We hypothesized that the stressors would worsen performance, and that stress-induced diminution in performance would be inversely related to surgical experience. Methods: Twenty participants (10 surgeons and 10 medical students) completed a peg-threading task using a laparoscopic simulator: three times under control conditions, next with a visual distraction overlay (progressive red saturation of the surgical field, timing personalized to the user's index performance), and then with an auditory distraction overlay (operating theater environment noise). Task completion time and instrument tracking metrics (instrument tip distance traveled and instrument smoothness) were measured. Results: Under control conditions, surgeons completed the task significantly faster, with greater economy of movement, and improved instrument smoothness-compared with students. When exposed to distracting stimuli, the groups behaved differently. Surgeons completed the task more slowly, instrument movements became less smooth (significantly so under audio distraction conditions), but total distance traveled by instruments was unchanged. By contrast, student performance was not impaired and, in some ways, improved. Conclusion: The impact of visual and auditory distraction on surgical performance can be modeled in a laparoscopic simulation environment. The effect of distraction varies according to expertise. This environment may be an effective setting within which to learn to mitigate stress-induced diminution in performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Objective performance feedback has potential to maximize the training benefit of laparoscopic simulators. Instrument movement metrics are, however, currently the preserve of complex and expensive systems. We aimed to develop and validate affordable, user-ready software that provides objective feedback by tracking instrument movement in a "take-home" laparoscopic simulator. Materials and Methods: Computer-vision processing tracks the movement of colored bands placed around the distal instrument shafts. The position of each instrument is logged from the simulator camera feed and movement metrics calculated in real time. Ten novices (junior doctors) and 13 general surgery trainees (StR) (training years 3-7) performed a standardized task (threading string through hoops) on the eoSim (eoSurgical™ Ltd., Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom) take-home laparoscopic simulator. Statistical analysis was performed using unpaired t tests with Welch's correction. Results: The software was able to track the instrument tips reliably and effectively. Significant differences between the two groups were observed in time to complete task (StR versus novice, 2 minutes 33 seconds versus 9 minutes 53 seconds; P=.01), total distance traveled by instruments (3.29 m versus 11.38 m, respectively; P=.01), average instrument motion smoothness (0.15 mm/second(3) versus 0.06 mm/second(3), respectively; P<.01), and handedness (mean difference between dominant and nondominant hand) (0.55 m versus 2.43 m, respectively; P=.03). There was no significant difference seen in the distance between instrument tips, acceleration, speed of instruments, or time off-screen. Conclusions: We have developed software that brings objective performance feedback to the portable laparoscopic box simulator. Construct validity has been demonstrated. Removing the need for additional motion-tracking hardware makes it affordable and accessible. It is user-ready and has the potential to enhance the training benefit of portable simulators both in the workplace and at home. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Objective performance feedback has potential to maximize the training benefit of laparoscopic simulators. Instrument movement metrics are, however, currently the preserve of complex and expensive systems. We aimed to develop and validate affordable, user-ready software that provides objective feedback by tracking instrument movement in a 'take-home' laparoscopic simulator. Materials and Methods: Computer-vision processing tracks the movement of colored bands placed around the distal instrument shafts. The position of each instrument is logged from the simulator camera feed and movement metrics calculated in real time. Ten novices (junior doctors) and 13 general surgery trainees (StR) (training years 3-7) performed a standardized task (threading string through hoops) on the eoSim (eoSurgical™ Ltd., Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom) take-home laparoscopic simulator. Statistical analysis was performed using unpaired t tests with Welch's correction. Results: The software was able to track the instrument tips reliably and effectively. Significant differences between the two groups were observed in time to complete task (StR versus novice, 2 minutes 33 seconds versus 9 minutes 53 seconds; P=.01), total distance traveled by instruments (3.29 m versus 11.38 m, respectively; P=.01), average instrument motion smoothness (0.15 mm/second3 versus 0.06 mm/second3, respectively; P<.01), and handedness (mean difference between dominant and nondominant hand) (0.55 m versus 2.43 m, respectively; P=.03). There was no significant difference seen in the distance between instrument tips, acceleration, speed of instruments, or time off-screen. Conclusions: We have developed software that brings objective performance feedback to the portable laparoscopic box simulator. Construct validity has been demonstrated. Removing the need for additional motion-tracking hardware makes it affordable and accessible. It is user-ready and has the potential to enhance the training benefit of portable simulators both in the workplace and at home. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Phase 1 clinical trials remain vital for oncology care. Patients on these trials require supportive care for quality-of-life (QOL) concerns. Objective: To test a Palliative Care Intervention (PCI) for patients with solid tumors enrolled in Phase I therapeutic trials with a priori hypothesis that psychological distress, QOL, satisfaction, symptoms, and resource utilization would be improved in the PCI group. Design: This unblinded randomized trial compared the PCI with usual care in patients accrued to Phase I Clinical Trials. Subjects (n = 479) were followed for 24 weeks, with 12 weeks as the primary outcome. Setting: Two Comprehensive Cancer Centers in the United States. Subjects: A consecutive sample, 21 years or older, English fluency, with solid tumors initiating a Phase 1 trial. Measurements: Psychological Distress (Distress Thermometer), QOL total and subscales (FACT-G), satisfaction (FAM-CARE), survival, and resource utilization (chart audit). Results: PCI subjects showed improved Psychological Distress (−0.47, p = 0.015) and Emotional Well-Being (0.81, p = 0.045), with differences on variables of QOL and distress between sites. High rates of symptom-management admissions (41.3%) and low rates of Advance Directive completion (39.0%), and hospice enrollment (30.7%), despite a median survival in both groups of 10.1 months from initiating a Phase 1 study. Conclusions: A nurse-delivered PCI can improve some QOL outcomes and distress for patients participating in Phase 1 trials. Greater integration of PC is needed to provide quality care to these patients and to support transitions from treatment to supportive care, especially at the end of life. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01612598. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Advanced cancer patients participating in phase 1 clinical trials experience considerable symptom burden. Palliative care (PC) may benefit these individuals by providing supportive care during clinical research participation. This study investigates integration of a PC intervention among phase 1 trial participants with advanced cancer. Methods and Materials: This study is a multisite randomized clinical trial testing a concurrent PC intervention among phase 1 trial participants. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics and descriptive baseline assessment findings were examined for all participants to date. Self-report assessments included quality of life (QOL) using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General, spirituality using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spirituality, and overall distress using the Distress Thermometer. Clinical trial retention and healthcare utilization were assessed through chart audit at study completion. Results: The study has enrolled 178 participants to date. The average age is 60.3 years, the majority was Caucasian (57.9%), and participants had an average of 1.7 comorbidities. Overall QOL was 77.6 (±15.1). Responses were most favorable for social/family well-being (22.6 ± 4.6), lowest for emotional well-being (14.9 ± 5.1), and average overall distress was 3.6 (±2.7). Healthcare utilization at study completion ( n = 134) identified low rates of supportive care referrals, with approximately half of participants referred to social work (50.8%), and fewer referred for pain (43%), resource centers (44%), and physical therapy (18%). Conclusion: Phase 1 clinical trial participants experience unmet QOL needs at baseline and levels of distress that merit clinical intervention. Although this study is in progress, initial findings support the potential benefits of PC among this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]