Introduction: Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) can provide the tools to safely master minimally invasive surgery (MIS) skills in patient-free environments and receive immediate objective feedback without the constant presence of an instructor. However, TEL-based systems tend to work isolated from one another, focus on different skills, and fail to provide contents without a sound pedagogical background. Objective: The objective of this descriptive study is to present in detail EASIER, an innovative TEL platform for surgical and interventional training, as well as the results of its validation. Methods: EASIER provides a Learning Management System (LMS) for institutions and content creators that can connect and integrate TEL “external assets” (virtual reality simulators, augmented box trainers, augmented videos, etc.) addressing different skills. The platform integrates all skills under an Assessment Module that measures skills’ progress in different courses. Finally, it provides content creators with a pedagogical model to scaffold contents while retaining flexibility to approach course design with different training philosophies in mind. Three courses were developed and hosted in the platform to validate it with end-users in terms of usability, performance, learning results in the courses and student self-perception on learning. Results: In total 111 volunteers completed the validation. The study was limited due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which limited access to external assets (virtual reality simulators). Nevertheless, usability was rated with 73.1 in the System Usability Scale. Most positive aspects on performance were easiness to access the platform, easiness to change the configuration and not requiring additional plug-ins to use the platform. The platform was rated above average in the six scales of the User Experience Questionnaire. Overall, student results improved significantly across the three courses (p < 0.05). Conclusions: This study provides, within its limitations, evidence on the usefulness of the EASIER platform for distance learning of MIS skills. Results show the potential impact of the platform and are an encouraging boost for the future, especially in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Motion tracking software for assessing laparoscopic surgical proficiency has been proven to be effective in differentiating between expert and novice performances. However, with several indices that can be generated from the software, there is no set threshold that can be used to benchmark performances. The aim of this study was to identify the best possible algorithm that can be used to benchmark expert, intermediate and novice performances for objective evaluation of psychomotor skills. 12 video recordings of various surgeons were collected in a blinded fashion. Data from our previous study of 6 experts and 23 novices was also included in the analysis to determine thresholds for performance. Video recording were analyzed both by the Kinovea 0.8.15 software and a blinded expert observer using the CAT form. Multiple algorithms were tested to accurately identify expert and novice performances. ½ L + 13 A + 16 J scoring of path length, average movement and jerk index respectively resulted in identifying 23/24 performances. Comparing the algorithm to CAT assessment yielded in a linear regression coefficient R² of 0.844. The value of motion tracking software in providing objective clinical evaluation and retrospective analysis is evident. Given the prospective use of this tool the algorithm developed in this study proves to be effective in benchmarking performances for psychomotor skills evaluation.

Introduction: Effectiveness of e-learning diminishes without the support of a pedagogical model to guide its use. In minimally invasive surgery (MIS), this has been reported as a limitation when technology is used to deliver contents without a sound pedagogical background. Material and methods: We describe how a generic pedagogical model, the 3D pedagogy framework, can be used for setting learning outcomes and activities in e-learning platforms focused on MIS cognitive skills. A demonstrator course on Nissen fundoplication was developed following the model step-by-step in the MISTELA learning platform. Course design was informed by Kolb’s Experiential learning model. Content validation was performed by 13 MIS experts. Results: Ten experts agreed on the suitability of content structuring done according to the pedagogical model. All experts agreed that the course provides means to assess the intended learning outcomes. Conclusions: This work showcases how a general-purpose e-learning framework can be accommodated to the needs of MIS training without limiting the course designers’ pedagogical approach. Key advances for its success include: (1) proving the validity of the model in the wider scope of MIS skills and (2) raising awareness amongst stakeholders on the need of developing training plans with explicit, rather than assumed, pedagogical foundations. Abbreviations: MIS: minimally invasive surgery; TEL: technology enhanced learning.

Background: The use of motion tracking has been proved to provide an objective assessment in surgical skills training. Current systems, however, require the use of additional equipment or specialised laparoscopic instruments and cameras to extract the data. The aim of this study was to determine the possibility of using a software-based solution to extract the data. Methods: 6 expert and 23 novice participants performed a basic laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedure in the operating room. The recorded videos were analysed using Kinovea 0.8.15 and the following parameters calculated the path length, average instrument movement and number of sudden or extreme movements. Results: The analysed data showed that experts had significantly shorter path length (median 127 cm vs. 187 cm, p = 0.01), smaller average movements (median 0.40 cm vs. 0.32 cm, p = 0.002) and fewer sudden movements (median 14.00 vs. 21.61, p = 0.001) than their novice counterparts. Conclusion: The use of software-based video motion tracking of laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a simple and viable method enabling objective assessment of surgical performance. It provides clear discrimination between expert and novice performance.

Background: The concept of self-assessment has been widely acclaimed for its role in the professional development cycle and self-regulation. In the field of medical education, self-assessment has been most used to evaluate the cognitive knowledge of students. The complexity of training and evaluation in laparoscopic surgery has previously acted as a barrier in determining the benefits self-assessment has to offer in comparison with other fields of medical education. Methods: Thirty-five surgical residents who attended the 2-day Laparoscopic Surgical Skills Grade 1 Level 1 curriculum were invited to participate from The Netherlands, India and Romania. The competency assessment tool (CAT) for laparoscopic cholecystectomy was used for self- and expert-assessment and the resulting distributions assessed. Results: A comparison between the expert- and self-assessed aggregates of scores from the CAT agreed with previous studies. Uniquely to this study, the aggregates of individual sub-categories—‘use of instruments’; ‘tissue handling’; and errors ‘within the component tasks’ and the ‘end product’ from both self- and expert-assessments—were investigated. There was strong positive correlation (r_s > 0.5; p < 0.001) between the expert- and self-assessment in all categories with only the ‘tissue handling’ having a weaker correlation (r_s = 0.3; p = 0.04). The distribution of the mean of the differences between self-assessment and expert-assessment suggested no significant difference between the scores of experts and the residents in all categories except the ‘end product’ evaluation where the difference was significant (W = 119, p = 0.03). Conclusion: Self-assessment using the CAT form gives results that are consistently not different from expert-assessment when assessing one’s proficiency in surgical skills. Areas where there was less agreement could be explained by variations in the level of training and understanding of the assessment criteria.