Do Motion Metrics Lead to Improved Skill Acquisition on Simulators?

Brief summary

Reproduced verbatim from the official ClinicalTrials.gov record. Not medical advice.

Emphasizing the growing popularity of motion metrics are the majority of available virtual reality simulators and some newer hybrid models that offer motion tracking for performance assessment. A popular hybrid model (PROMIS) allows training with regular laparoscopic instruments in a box-trainer while automatically recording task duration and movement efficiency (pathlength and smoothness) that are immediately offered as feedback to trainees. Despite the increasing availability of simulators that track motion, our knowledge of the impact those metrics have on trainee learning is severely limited. We do not know if it is more important to use speed, accuracy, motion efficiency or a combination thereof for performance assessment and how these metrics impact skill transfer to the OR. Based on sound educational principles we have developed a proficiency-based laparoscopic suturing simulator curriculum. This curriculum focuses on deliberate and distributed practice, provides trainees with augmented feedback and sets expert-derived performance goals based on time and errors. We have previously demonstrated that this curriculum leads to improved operative performance of trainees compared to controls. To measure operative performance and determine transferability, we will use a live porcine Nissen fundoplication model. Instead of placing actual patients at risk, the porcine model is preferable for this purpose as it offers objective metrics (targets are established, distances measured, knots are disrupted for slippage scoring), complete standardization, and allows multiple individuals to be tested on the same day. We hypothesize that proficiency-based simulator training in laparoscopic suturing to expert-derived levels of speed and motion will result in better operative performance compared to participants training to levels of speed or motion alone. The study is powered to detect an at least 10% performance difference between the groups. Specific Aims 1. Compare whether any performance differences between the groups persist long-term 2. Assess whether the groups demonstrate differences in safety in the operating room by comparing the inadvertent injuries in the animal OR between the groups 3. Identify the training duration required by novices to reach proficiency in laparoscopic suturing based on speed, motion efficiency, or a combination of these metrics 4. Identify any baseline participant characteristics that may predict individual metric-specific performance

About this trial record page

What this page shows

Public field values for ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT01052168, including study identification, conditions, interventions, eligibility (age, sex, healthy volunteer), timeline, and U.S. site list.

What this page does not do

No medical advice, eligibility judgments, treatment recommendations, study quality scoring, or AI-generated medical summaries. No site contact phone numbers, emails, or investigator names.

Where the data comes from

Sourced from the official ClinicalTrials.gov public API. The official record is the source of truth.

Last refresh

Last update posted Apr 26, 2022 · Synced Sep 5, 2026

Related: full search, browse by condition, browse by drug or therapy, browse by sponsor, browse by U.S. city.