• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • MIS Fellows Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
  • Opportunities
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • Search
    • Search the SAGES Site
    • Guidelines Search
    • Video Search
    • Search Images
    • Search Abstracts
  • OWLS/FLS
  • Login
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Assessing Surgical Performance in Foregut Surgery: a Systematic Review

Assessing Surgical Performance in Foregut Surgery: a Systematic Review

Elif Bilgic1, Mohammed Al Mahroos1, Tara Landry2, Gerald M Fried1, Melina C Vassiliou1, Liane S Feldman1. 1Mcgill University, 2Montreal General Hospital Medical Library

Introduction: Operative skills have been shown to correlate with patient outcomes, yet at the completion of training or after learning a new procedure, these skills are not formally evaluated.  SAGES and others are interested in using video of procedures for summative assessment of laparoscopic foregut surgery (LFS). As this may be used to determine competency, it must meet the robust criteria established for “high-stakes” assessments. The purpose of this review is to identify tools that have been used to assess LFS and evaluate the available validity evidence for each instrument.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted up to July 2017. Eligible studies reported data on tools used to assess performance in the operating-room during LFS. Two independent reviewers considered 1084 citations for eligibility. The characteristics of each assessment tool were recorded. Validity evidence was evaluated using 5 sources of validity (content, response process, internal structure, relationship to other variables, and consequences). Evidence was summarized by providing a score of 0-3 for each source, for a maximum score of 15(1-5 limited evidence, 6-10 moderate, 11-15 strong).

Results: Overall, 10 separate tools were identified, all evaluating technical skills. Four tools were generic to laparoscopy, 1 was specific to laparoscopic suturing(LS), and 5 specific to LFS (2 specific to nissen fundoplication(NF), 1 heller myotomy (HM), 1 paraesophageal hernia repair (PEH), and 1 LS during NF. Overall, only 2 assessments were supported by moderate evidence (one specific to LS in NF and one generic), while the others had limited or unknown evidence. Validity evidence was based mainly on internal structure (8 tools reporting reliability and item analysis) and relationship to other variables (6 comparing scores in subjects with different clinical experience). There was little or no evidence supporting test content (3 studies referencing previous papers for tool development in the context of clinical assessment, regarding laparoscopy, NF, and LS in NF), test response process (2 studies reporting rater training), and consequences (no studies). Six tools were identified to have evidence for video-assessment; 2 generic, 2 specific to NF, 1 to LS, and 1 to LS in NF. Only the tool specific for LS in NF had moderate evidence, while others had limited evidence.

Conclusion: There is limited evidence supporting the validity of intraoperative assessment tools for laparoscopic forgut surgery. This precludes their use for summative video-based assessment to verify competency. Further research is needed to develop an assessment tool for this purpose. 


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 85167

Program Number: S082

Presentation Session: MIS Education Session

Presentation Type: Podium

46


  • Foundation
  • SAGES.TV
  • MyCME
  • Educational Activities

Copyright © 2025 Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons