Computer enhanced visual learning method to train urology residents in pediatric orchiopexy provided a consistent learning experience in a multi-institutional trial

Leslie McQuiston*, Andrew MacNeily, Dennis Liu, Jennie Mickelson, Elizabeth Yerkes, Anthony Chaviano, David Roth, Rachel Stork Stoltz, Daniel B. Herz, Max Maizels

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Computer enhanced visual learning is a new method to train residents to perform surgery using components and provide them with access to a personalized surgical feedback archive using the Internet. At the parent institution in Chicago we have already noted that this method is effective to train residents to perform orchiopexy. To assess whether this new methodology to enhance resident surgical instruction is generalizable we performed a prospective, multi-institutional clinical trial. Materials and Methods: We prospectively compared ratings of resident skills in performing pediatric orchiopexy at 4 institutions as novices to computer enhanced visual learning curriculum (study group) vs those at the single institution accustomed to that curriculum (control group). All urology residents and attending physicians accessed the computer enhanced visual learning curriculum. After each case was completed the attending urologist rated resident performance of each step and provided feedback on weaknesses for the resident to remediate at the next case. The learning score was calculated for each case as the sum of the ratings × case difficulty. Scores on the first case and the best case were compared between the study and control groups by resident and institution. Results: The study group included 6 attending physicians and 36 residents (99 orchiopexies). The control group included 8 attending physicians and 21 residents (108 orchiopexies). Between the study and control groups we noted no significant differences in average resident postgraduate year (2.9 vs 2.7), number of procedures per resident (3.9 vs 4.9), frequency with which residents viewed computer enhanced visual learning preoperatively (63% vs 74%) or attending physician provision of feedback (63% vs 88%) (each p not significant). Similarly of residents who completed more than 1 surgery there was no significant difference in the percent who showed an improved learning score in the study vs the control group (86% vs 79%) or in the magnitude of average improvement (10.5 vs 13.4) (each p not significant). Conclusions: The institutional groups did not differ in training resident skills using computer enhanced visual learning for pediatric orchiopexy. Thus, the program provides a consistent learning experience and is generalizable across institutions. We believe that this tool will change the practice of how training programs educate residents by enhancing learning by a checklist approach and a computer platform to archive feedback and remediation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1748-1753
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume184
Issue number4 SUPPL.
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2010

Fingerprint

Orchiopexy
Urology
Learning
Pediatrics
Control Groups
Curriculum
Physicians
Checklist
Internet
Clinical Trials
Education

Keywords

  • computers
  • education medical
  • internship and residency
  • orchiopexy
  • testish

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

McQuiston, Leslie ; MacNeily, Andrew ; Liu, Dennis ; Mickelson, Jennie ; Yerkes, Elizabeth ; Chaviano, Anthony ; Roth, David ; Stoltz, Rachel Stork ; Herz, Daniel B. ; Maizels, Max. / Computer enhanced visual learning method to train urology residents in pediatric orchiopexy provided a consistent learning experience in a multi-institutional trial. In: Journal of Urology. 2010 ; Vol. 184, No. 4 SUPPL. pp. 1748-1753.
@article{f263a427ac154637a1152b0803ae0b11,
title = "Computer enhanced visual learning method to train urology residents in pediatric orchiopexy provided a consistent learning experience in a multi-institutional trial",
abstract = "Purpose: Computer enhanced visual learning is a new method to train residents to perform surgery using components and provide them with access to a personalized surgical feedback archive using the Internet. At the parent institution in Chicago we have already noted that this method is effective to train residents to perform orchiopexy. To assess whether this new methodology to enhance resident surgical instruction is generalizable we performed a prospective, multi-institutional clinical trial. Materials and Methods: We prospectively compared ratings of resident skills in performing pediatric orchiopexy at 4 institutions as novices to computer enhanced visual learning curriculum (study group) vs those at the single institution accustomed to that curriculum (control group). All urology residents and attending physicians accessed the computer enhanced visual learning curriculum. After each case was completed the attending urologist rated resident performance of each step and provided feedback on weaknesses for the resident to remediate at the next case. The learning score was calculated for each case as the sum of the ratings × case difficulty. Scores on the first case and the best case were compared between the study and control groups by resident and institution. Results: The study group included 6 attending physicians and 36 residents (99 orchiopexies). The control group included 8 attending physicians and 21 residents (108 orchiopexies). Between the study and control groups we noted no significant differences in average resident postgraduate year (2.9 vs 2.7), number of procedures per resident (3.9 vs 4.9), frequency with which residents viewed computer enhanced visual learning preoperatively (63{\%} vs 74{\%}) or attending physician provision of feedback (63{\%} vs 88{\%}) (each p not significant). Similarly of residents who completed more than 1 surgery there was no significant difference in the percent who showed an improved learning score in the study vs the control group (86{\%} vs 79{\%}) or in the magnitude of average improvement (10.5 vs 13.4) (each p not significant). Conclusions: The institutional groups did not differ in training resident skills using computer enhanced visual learning for pediatric orchiopexy. Thus, the program provides a consistent learning experience and is generalizable across institutions. We believe that this tool will change the practice of how training programs educate residents by enhancing learning by a checklist approach and a computer platform to archive feedback and remediation.",
keywords = "computers, education medical, internship and residency, orchiopexy, testish",
author = "Leslie McQuiston and Andrew MacNeily and Dennis Liu and Jennie Mickelson and Elizabeth Yerkes and Anthony Chaviano and David Roth and Stoltz, {Rachel Stork} and Herz, {Daniel B.} and Max Maizels",
year = "2010",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.072",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "184",
pages = "1748--1753",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4 SUPPL.",

}

Computer enhanced visual learning method to train urology residents in pediatric orchiopexy provided a consistent learning experience in a multi-institutional trial. / McQuiston, Leslie; MacNeily, Andrew; Liu, Dennis; Mickelson, Jennie; Yerkes, Elizabeth; Chaviano, Anthony; Roth, David; Stoltz, Rachel Stork; Herz, Daniel B.; Maizels, Max.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 184, No. 4 SUPPL., 01.01.2010, p. 1748-1753.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Computer enhanced visual learning method to train urology residents in pediatric orchiopexy provided a consistent learning experience in a multi-institutional trial

AU - McQuiston, Leslie

AU - MacNeily, Andrew

AU - Liu, Dennis

AU - Mickelson, Jennie

AU - Yerkes, Elizabeth

AU - Chaviano, Anthony

AU - Roth, David

AU - Stoltz, Rachel Stork

AU - Herz, Daniel B.

AU - Maizels, Max

PY - 2010/1/1

Y1 - 2010/1/1

N2 - Purpose: Computer enhanced visual learning is a new method to train residents to perform surgery using components and provide them with access to a personalized surgical feedback archive using the Internet. At the parent institution in Chicago we have already noted that this method is effective to train residents to perform orchiopexy. To assess whether this new methodology to enhance resident surgical instruction is generalizable we performed a prospective, multi-institutional clinical trial. Materials and Methods: We prospectively compared ratings of resident skills in performing pediatric orchiopexy at 4 institutions as novices to computer enhanced visual learning curriculum (study group) vs those at the single institution accustomed to that curriculum (control group). All urology residents and attending physicians accessed the computer enhanced visual learning curriculum. After each case was completed the attending urologist rated resident performance of each step and provided feedback on weaknesses for the resident to remediate at the next case. The learning score was calculated for each case as the sum of the ratings × case difficulty. Scores on the first case and the best case were compared between the study and control groups by resident and institution. Results: The study group included 6 attending physicians and 36 residents (99 orchiopexies). The control group included 8 attending physicians and 21 residents (108 orchiopexies). Between the study and control groups we noted no significant differences in average resident postgraduate year (2.9 vs 2.7), number of procedures per resident (3.9 vs 4.9), frequency with which residents viewed computer enhanced visual learning preoperatively (63% vs 74%) or attending physician provision of feedback (63% vs 88%) (each p not significant). Similarly of residents who completed more than 1 surgery there was no significant difference in the percent who showed an improved learning score in the study vs the control group (86% vs 79%) or in the magnitude of average improvement (10.5 vs 13.4) (each p not significant). Conclusions: The institutional groups did not differ in training resident skills using computer enhanced visual learning for pediatric orchiopexy. Thus, the program provides a consistent learning experience and is generalizable across institutions. We believe that this tool will change the practice of how training programs educate residents by enhancing learning by a checklist approach and a computer platform to archive feedback and remediation.

AB - Purpose: Computer enhanced visual learning is a new method to train residents to perform surgery using components and provide them with access to a personalized surgical feedback archive using the Internet. At the parent institution in Chicago we have already noted that this method is effective to train residents to perform orchiopexy. To assess whether this new methodology to enhance resident surgical instruction is generalizable we performed a prospective, multi-institutional clinical trial. Materials and Methods: We prospectively compared ratings of resident skills in performing pediatric orchiopexy at 4 institutions as novices to computer enhanced visual learning curriculum (study group) vs those at the single institution accustomed to that curriculum (control group). All urology residents and attending physicians accessed the computer enhanced visual learning curriculum. After each case was completed the attending urologist rated resident performance of each step and provided feedback on weaknesses for the resident to remediate at the next case. The learning score was calculated for each case as the sum of the ratings × case difficulty. Scores on the first case and the best case were compared between the study and control groups by resident and institution. Results: The study group included 6 attending physicians and 36 residents (99 orchiopexies). The control group included 8 attending physicians and 21 residents (108 orchiopexies). Between the study and control groups we noted no significant differences in average resident postgraduate year (2.9 vs 2.7), number of procedures per resident (3.9 vs 4.9), frequency with which residents viewed computer enhanced visual learning preoperatively (63% vs 74%) or attending physician provision of feedback (63% vs 88%) (each p not significant). Similarly of residents who completed more than 1 surgery there was no significant difference in the percent who showed an improved learning score in the study vs the control group (86% vs 79%) or in the magnitude of average improvement (10.5 vs 13.4) (each p not significant). Conclusions: The institutional groups did not differ in training resident skills using computer enhanced visual learning for pediatric orchiopexy. Thus, the program provides a consistent learning experience and is generalizable across institutions. We believe that this tool will change the practice of how training programs educate residents by enhancing learning by a checklist approach and a computer platform to archive feedback and remediation.

KW - computers

KW - education medical

KW - internship and residency

KW - orchiopexy

KW - testish

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79955874949&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79955874949&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.072

DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.072

M3 - Article

VL - 184

SP - 1748

EP - 1753

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 4 SUPPL.

ER -