A Randomized Multicenter Study Assessing the Educational Impact of a Computerized Interactive Hysterectomy Trainer on Gynecology Residents

Study Objective To assess the improvement of cognitive surgical knowledge of laparoscopic hysterectomy in postgraduate year (PGY) 1 and 2 gynecology residents who used an interactive computer-based Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Trainer (Red Llama, Inc., Seattle, WA). Design A multicenter, randomized, controlled study (Canadian Task Force classification I). Setting Five departments of obstetrics and gynecology: Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA; University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA; University of Washington, Seattle, WA; University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Participants Gynecology residents, fellows, faculty, and minimally invasive surgeons. Interventions The use of an interactive computer-based Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Trainer. Measurements and Main Results In phase 1 of this 3-phase multicenter study, 2 hysterectomy knowledge assessment tests (A and B) were developed using a modified Delphi technique. Phase 2 administered these 2 online tests to PGY 3 and 4 gynecology residents, gynecology surgical fellows, faculty, and minimally invasive surgeons (n = 60). In phase 3, PGY 1 and 2 gynecology residents (n = 128) were recruited, and 101 chose to participate, were pretested (test A), and then randomized to the control or intervention group. Both groups continued site-specific training while the intervention group additionally used the Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Trainer. Participant residents were subsequently posttested (test B). Phase 2 results showed no differences between cognitive tests A and B when assessed for equivalence, internal consistency, and reliability. Construct validity was shown for both tests (p < .001). In phase 3, the pretest mean score for the control group was 242 (standard deviation [SD] = 56.5), and for the intervention group it was 217 (SD = 57.6) (nonsignificant difference, p = .089). The t test comparing the posttest control group (mean = 297, SD = 53.6) and the posttest intervention group (mean = 343, SD = 50.9) yielded a significant difference (p < .001, 95% confidence interval, 48.4–108.8). Posttest scores for the intervention group were significantly better than for the control group (p < .001). Conclusion Using the Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Trainer significantly increased knowledge of the hysterectomy procedure in PGY 1 and 2 gynecology residents.