↓ Skip to main content

Pedagogic Approach in the Surgical Learning: The First Period of “Assistant Surgeon” May Improve the Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Robotic-Assisted Hysterectomy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Surgery, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pedagogic Approach in the Surgical Learning: The First Period of “Assistant Surgeon” May Improve the Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Robotic-Assisted Hysterectomy
Published in
Frontiers in Surgery, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fsurg.2016.00058
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angeline Favre, Stephanie Huberlant, Marie Carbonnel, Julie Goetgheluck, Aurelie Revaux, Jean Marc Ayoubi

Abstract

Hysterectomy is the most frequent surgery done with robotic assistance in the world and has been widely studied since its emergence. The surgical outcomes of the robotic hysterectomy are similar to those obtained with other minimally invasive hysterectomy techniques (laparoscopic and vaginal) and appear as a promising surgical technique in gynecology surgery. The aim of this study was to observe the learning curve of robot-assisted hysterectomy in a French surgical center, and was to evaluate the impact of the surgical mentoring. We retrospectively collected the data from the files of the robot-assisted hysterectomies with the Da Vinci(®) Surgical System performed between March 2010 and June 2014 at the Foch hospital in Suresnes (France). We first studied the operative time according to the number of cases, independently of the surgeon to determine two periods: the initial learning phase (Phase 1) and the control of surgical skills phase (Phase 2). The phase was defined by mastering the basic surgical tasks. Secondarily, we compared these two periods for operative time, blood losses, body mass index (BMI), days of hospitalizations, and uterine weight. We, finally, studied the difference of the learning curve between an experimented surgeon (S1) who practiced first the robot-assisted hysterectomies and a less experimented surgeon (S2) who first assisted S1 and then operated on his own patients. A total of 154 robot-assisted hysterectomies were analyzed. Twenty procedures were necessary to access to the control of surgical skills phase. There was a significant decrease of the operative time between the learning phase (156.8 min) compared to the control of surgical skills phase (125.8 min, p = 0.003). No difference between these two periods for blood losses, BMI, days of hospitalizations and uterine weight was demonstrated. The learning curve of S1 showed 20 procedures to master the robot-assisted hysterectomies with a significant decrease of the operative time, while the learning curve of S2 showed no improvement in operative time with respect to case number. Twenty robot-assisted hysterectomies are necessary to achieve control of surgical skills. The companionship to learn robotic surgery seems also promising, by improving the learning phase for this surgical technique.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 14%
Other 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Professor 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 9 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 9%
Mathematics 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Computer Science 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 February 2017.
All research outputs
#18,493,111
of 22,914,829 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Surgery
#925
of 2,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,312
of 311,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Surgery
#9
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,914,829 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,915 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.