Home > Journals > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica > Past Issues > Articles online first > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 Aug 04

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as

 

 

Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 Aug 04

DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03747-9

Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

The performance improvement-score algorithm applied to endoscopic stone. Treatment step 1 protocol

Domenico VENEZIANO 1, 2, 3 , Giulio PATRUNO 4, Michele TALSO 5, Theodore TOKAS 6, Silvia PROIETTI 7, Angelo PORRECA 8, Guido KAMPHUIS 9, Shekhar BIYANI 10, Esteban EMILIANI 11, Marcos CEPEDA DELGADO 12, Lopez MARIA DE MAR PEREZ 13, Roberto MIANO 14, Stefania FERRETTI 15, Nicola MACCHIONE 16, Panagiotis KALLIDONIS 17, Emanuele MONTANARI 18, Giovanni TRIPEPI 19, Achilles PLOUMIDIS 20, Giovanni CACCIAMANI 21, Estevão LIMA 1, 2, Bhaskar K. SOMANI 22

1 Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), School of Medicine, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal; 2 ICVS/3B's, PT Government Associate Laboratory, Braga/Guimarães, Portugal; 3 Department of Urology and Kidney Transplant, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano, Reggio Calabria, Italy; 4 Department of Urology, AO San Giovanni Addolorata, Rome, Italy; 5 Department of Urology, ASST Vimercate, Monza, Italy; 6 Department of Urology and Andrology, General Hospital, Hall in Tirol, Austria; 7 Department of Urology, San Raffaele-Turro Hospital, Milan, Italy; 8 Department of Urology, Policlinico Abano Terme, Padova, Italy; 9 Department of Urology, AMC University Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 10 Department of Urology, St. James’s University Hospital Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS, Leeds, UK; 11 Department of Urology, Fundaciò Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain; 12 Department of Urology, Rio Hortega University, Valladolid, Spain; 13 Department of Urology, Centro de Cirugía de Mínima Invasión Jesús Usón, Caceres, Spain; 14 Department of Urology, Università Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy; 15 Department of Urology , AOU di Parma, Parma, Italy; 16 Department of Urology, Ospedale San Paolo, Milan, Italy; 17 Department of Urology, University of Patras, Greece; 18 Department of Urology, Policlinico Universitario, Milan, Italy; 19 CNR IFC, U.O. of Reggio Calabria, Reggio Calabria, Italy; 20 Department of Urology, Athens Medical Centre, Athens, Greece; 21 USC Institute of Urology & Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University
of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 22 Department of Urology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK


PDF


BACKGROUND: Pi-score (Performance Improvement score) has been proven to be reliable to measure performance improvement during E-BLUS hands-on training sessions. Our study is aimed to adapt and test the score to EST s1 (Endoscopic Stone Treatment step 1) protocol, in consideration of its worldwide adoption for practical training.
METHODS: The Pi-score algorithm considers time measurement and number of errors from two different repetitions (first and fifth) of the same training task and compares them to the relative task goals, to produce an objective score. Data were obtained from the first edition of ‘ART in Flexible Course’, during 4 courses in Barcelona and Milan. Collected data were independently analysed by the experts for Pi assessment. Their scores were compared for inter-rater reliability. The average scores from all tutors were then compared to the PI-score provided by our algorithm for each participant, in order to verify their statistical correlation. Kappa Statistics was used for comparison analysis.
RESULTS: 16 Hands-on Training expert tutors and 47 3rd year residents in Urology were involved. Concordance found between the 16 proctors’ scores was the following: Task1=0.30 (“fair”); Task2=0.18 (“slight”); Task3=0.10 (“slight”); Task4=0.20, (“slight”). Concordance between Pi-score results and proctor average scores per-participant was the following: Task1=0.74 (“substantial”); Task2=0.71 (“substantial”); Task3=0.46 (“moderate”); Task4=0.49 (“moderate”).
CONCLUSIONS: Our exploratory study demonstrates that Pi-score can be effectively adapted to EST s1. Our algorithm successfully provided an objective score that equals the average performance improvement scores assigned by of a cohort of experts, in relation to a small amount of training attempts.


KEY WORDS: EST s1; Pi-score; Hands-on training; Assessment; Endourology

top of page