Development and validation of an objective scoring tool to evaluate surgical dissection: Dissection Assessment for Robotic Technique (DART)

dc.contributor.authorVanstrum, Erik B.
dc.contributor.authorMa, Runzhuo
dc.contributor.authorMaya-Silva, Jacqueline
dc.contributor.authorSanford, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorNguyen, Jessica H.
dc.contributor.authorLei, Xiaomeng
dc.contributor.authorChevinksy, Michael
dc.contributor.authorGhoreifi, Alireza
dc.contributor.authorHan, Jullet
dc.contributor.authorPolotti, Charles F.
dc.contributor.authorPowers, Ryan
dc.contributor.authorYip, Wesley
dc.contributor.authorZhang, Michael
dc.contributor.authorAron, Monish
dc.contributor.authorCollins, Justin
dc.contributor.authorDaneshmand, Siamak
dc.contributor.authorDavis, John W.
dc.contributor.authorDesai, Mihir M.
dc.contributor.authorGerjy, Roger
dc.contributor.authorGoh, Alvin C.
dc.contributor.authorKimmig, Rainer
dc.contributor.authorLendvay, Thomas S.
dc.contributor.authorPorter, James
dc.contributor.authorSotelo, Rene
dc.contributor.authorSundaram, Chandru P.
dc.contributor.authorCen, Steven
dc.contributor.authorGill, Inderbir S.
dc.contributor.authorHung, Andrew J.
dc.contributor.departmentUrology, School of Medicine
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-05T17:34:59Z
dc.date.available2024-01-05T17:34:59Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Evaluation of surgical competency has important implications for training new surgeons, accreditation, and improving patient outcomes. A method to specifically evaluate dissection performance does not yet exist. This project aimed to design a tool to assess surgical dissection quality. Methods: Delphi method was used to validate structure and content of the dissection evaluation. A multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary panel of 14 expert surgeons systematically evaluated each element of the dissection tool. Ten blinded reviewers evaluated 46 de-identified videos of pelvic lymph node and seminal vesicle dissections during the robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Inter-rater variability was calculated using prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted kappa. The area under the curve from receiver operating characteristic curve was used to assess discrimination power for overall DART scores as well as domains in discriminating trainees (≤100 robotic cases) from experts (>100). Results: Four rounds of Delphi method achieved language and content validity in 27/28 elements. Use of 3- or 5-point scale remained contested; thus, both scales were evaluated during validation. The 3-point scale showed improved kappa for each domain. Experts demonstrated significantly greater total scores on both scales (3-point, p< 0.001; 5-point, p< 0.001). The ability to distinguish experience was equivalent for total score on both scales (3-point AUC= 0.92, CI 0.82-1.00, 5-point AUC= 0.92, CI 0.83-1.00). Conclusions: We present the development and validation of Dissection Assessment for Robotic Technique (DART), an objective and reproducible 3-point surgical assessment to evaluate tissue dissection. DART can effectively differentiate levels of surgeon experience and can be used in multiple surgical steps.
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's manuscript
dc.identifier.citationVanstrum EB, Ma R, Maya-Silva J, et al. Development and validation of an objective scoring tool to evaluate surgical dissection: Dissection Assessment for Robotic Technique (DART). Urol Pract. 2021;8(5):596-604. doi:10.1097/upj.0000000000000246
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/37663
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.
dc.relation.isversionof10.1097/upj.0000000000000246
dc.relation.journalUrology Practice
dc.rightsPublisher Policy
dc.sourcePMC
dc.subjectTissue dissection
dc.subjectSurgical education
dc.subjectAssessment tool
dc.titleDevelopment and validation of an objective scoring tool to evaluate surgical dissection: Dissection Assessment for Robotic Technique (DART)
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
nihms-1875028.pdf
Size:
370.27 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: