Incorporation of the fluoroless C-Arm Trainer at the American Urological Association hands on training percutaneous renal access

• Published in: World journal of urology Vol. 36; no. 7; pp. 1149 - 1155
• Main Authors: Noureldin, Yasser A., Hoenig, David M., Zhao, Philip, Elsamra, Sammy E., Stern, Joshua, Gaunay, Geoffrey, Motamedinia, Piruz, Okeke, Zeph, Rastinehad, Ardeshir R., Sweet, Robert M.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 01-07-2018; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Adult; Checklist; Clinical Competence; Female; Fluoroscopy; Humans; Kidney Calices - diagnostic imaging; Male; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous - education; Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous - instrumentation; Nephrology; Oncology; Original Article; Prospective Studies; Questionnaires; Self evaluation; Self-assessment; Simulation Training - methods; Training; Ultrasonography, Interventional; Urology; Training; Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy; Skills; Assessment
• ISSN: 0724-4983; 1433-8726
• DOI: 10.1007/s00345-018-2219-5

Objectives
To assess for usefulness and validity evidence for incorporating the C-Arm Trainer (CAT) simulator into the annual AUA hands on course for training percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).
Materials and methods
The course started with a didactic session followed by four stations for training the “bull’s eye” technique using the CAT simulator. Each station included a pre-test, 30-min practice on the simulator, and post-test. All participants were assessed using a 4-item checklist. All participants were asked to fill in a qualitative self-assessment questionnaire after the pre- and the post-test, and respond to a course evaluation questionnaire and post-course survey.
Results
A total of 38 physicians, who attended the hands on course, voluntarily participated in the study. Only 21.1% had previous practice on PCNL simulators. Compared with the results of the checklist total score and the qualitative self-assessment questionnaire scores after the pre-test, there was significant improvement in the checklist total score (
p
 < 0.001), temporal demands (
p
 = 0.003), situational stress (
p
 = 0.003, and performance (0.003) after the post-test. A total of 14 (36%) participants responded to the course evaluation questionnaire, 50% evaluated the course as excellent, 28.6% as very good, and 21.4% as good. Unfortunately, only five (13%) participants responded to the post-course survey, 4/5 implemented the new competencies and knowledge into their practice, and 3/5 have attempted to obtain fluoroscopic guided PCA without assistance.
Conclusion
The CAT simulator was considered useful for training the percutaneous renal access procedure. There was significant improvement in the qualitative and quantitative assessment parameters after the post-test compared with the pre-test.