Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Identification of surgeon–individual treatment profiles to support the provision of an optimum treatment service for cataract patients

  • Published:
Journal of Ocular Biology, Diseases, and Informatics

Abstract

One objective of ophthalmological departments is the optimization of patient treatment services. A strategy for optimization is the identification of individual potential for advanced training of surgeons based on their daily working results. The objective of this feasibility study was the presentation and evaluation of a strategy for the computation of surgeon–individual treatment profiles (SiTPs). We observed experienced surgeons during their standard daily performance of cataract procedures in the Ophthalmological Department of the University Medical Center Leipzig, Germany. One hundred five cases of cataract procedures were measured as Surgical Process Models (SPMs) with a detailed-to-the-second resolution. The procedures were performed by three different surgeons during their daily work. Subsequently, SiTPs were computed and analyzed from the SPMs as statistical ‘mean’ treatment strategies for each of the surgeons. The feasibility study demonstrated that it is possible to identify differences in surgeon–individual treatment profiles beyond the resolution of cut–suture times. Surgeon–individual workflows, activity frequencies and average performance durations of surgical activities during cataract procedures were analyzed. Highly significant (p < 0.001) workflow differences were found between the treatment profiles of the three surgeons. Conclusively, the generation of SiTPs is a convenient strategy to identify surgeon–individual training potentials in cataract surgery. Concrete recommendations for further education can be derived from the profiles.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ezra DG, Chandra A, Okhravi N, Sullivan P, McDonnell P, Lee J. Higher surgical training in ophthalmology: trends in cumulative surgical experience 1993–2008. Eye [Internet]. 2010 Apr 30 [zitiert 2010 Juli 5];Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/eye.2010.54.

  2. Ayanniyi AA, Adepoju FG, Owoeye JF. Trainee ophthalmologists’ opinions on ways to improve cataract surgical rate. Ann Afr Med. 2009;8(4):276–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. AHRQ. Agency for Health Care Research and Quality: National Guideline Clearinghouse [Internet]. 2008;Available from: http://www.guideline.gov.

  4. AWMF-Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e.V. Science-based Guidelines for Diagnostics and Therapy issued by the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany [Internet]. 2010 [zitiert 2010 Juni 29];Available from: http://www.awmf-leitlinien.de/.

  5. Henderson B, Kim J, Golnik K, Oetting T, Lee A, Volpe N, et al. Evaluation of the virtual mentor cataract training program. Ophthalmology. 2010;117(2):253–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Prakash G, Jhanji V, Sharma N, Gupta K, Titiyal JS, Vajpayee RB. Assessment of perceived difficulties by residents in performing routine steps in phacoemulsification surgery and in managing complications. Can J Ophthalmol. 2009;44(3):284–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rogers GM, Oetting TA, Lee AG, Grignon C, Greenlee E, Johnson AT, et al. Impact of a structured surgical curriculum on ophthalmic resident cataract surgery complication rates. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35(11):1956–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hashimoto C, Kurosaka D, Uetsuki Y. Teaching continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis using a postmortem pig eye with simulated cataract. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001;27(6):814–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Figueira E, Wang L, Brown T, Masselos K, Pandya V, Dauber S, et al. The grape: an appropriate model for continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008;34(9):1610–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fisher JB, Binenbaum G, Tapino P, Volpe NJ. Development and face and content validity of an eye surgical skills assessment test for ophthalmology residents. Ophthalmology. 2006;113(12):2364–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Cremers SL, Ciolino JB, Ferrufino-Ponce ZK, Henderson BA. Objective Assessment of Skills in Intraocular Surgery (OASIS). Ophthalmology. 2005;112(7):1236–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Taylor JB, Binenbaum G, Tapino P, Volpe NJ. Microsurgical lab testing is a reliable method for assessing ophthalmology residents’ surgical skills. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007;91(12):1691–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Saleh GM, Gauba V, Mitra A, Litwin AS, Chung AKK, Benjamin L. Objective structured assessment of cataract surgical skill. Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125(3):363–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bhogal MM, Angunawela RI, Little BC. Use of low-cost video recording device in reflective practice in cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010;36(4):542–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Neumuth T, Trantakis C, Riffaud L, Strauss G, Meixensberger J, Burgert O. Assessment of technical needs for surgical equipment by Surgical Process Models. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2009;18(6):841–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Neumuth T, Jannin P, Schlomberg J, Meixensberger J, Wiedemann P, Burgert O. Analysis of surgical intervention populations using generic surgical process models. Int J CARS. 2010;6:59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Malik R, White P, Macewen C. Using human reliability analysis to detect surgical error in endoscopic DCR surgery. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 2003;28(5):456–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Mehta N, Haluck R, Frecker M, Snyder A. Sequence and task analysis of instrument use in common laparoscopic procedures. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(2):280–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Strauss G, Fischer M, Meixensberger J, Falk V, Trantakis C, Winkler D, et al. Workflow analysis to assess the efficiency of intraoperative technology using the example of functional endoscopic sinus surgery. HNO. 2006;54(7):528–35.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Münchenberg JE, Brief J, Raczkowsky J, Wörn H, Hassfeld S, Mühling J. Operation planning of robot supported surgical Interventions. In: Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE Computer Society; 2001. p. 547–52.

  21. Casaletto JA, Rajaratnam V. Surgical process re-engineering: carpal tunnel decompression—a model. Hand Surg. 2004;9(1):19–27.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. MacKenzie C, Ibbotson A, Cao C, Lomax A. Hierarchical decomposition of laparoscopic surgery: a human factors approach to investigating the operating room environment. Min Invas Ther All Technol. 2001;10(3):121–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jannin P, Raimbault M, Morandi X, Riffaud L, Gibaud B. Model of surgical procedures for multimodal image-guided neurosurgery. Comput Aided Surg. 2003;8(2):98–106.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Jannin P, Morandi X. Surgical models for computer-assisted neurosurgery. Neuroimage. 2007;37(3):783–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. DOG. Veröffentlichungen der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft e.V. [Internet]. Deutsche Ophthalomoligsche Gesellschaft e.V. 2009;Available from: http://www.dog.org/publikationen/index.html.

  26. Neumuth T, Jannin P, Strauss G, Meixensberger J, Burgert O. Validation of knowledge acquisition for surgical process models. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16(1):72–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Neumuth T, Durstewitz N, Fischer M, Strauß G, Dietz A, Meixensberger J, et al. Structured recording of intraoperative surgical workflows. In: Horii S, Ratib O, herausgeber. Bellingham, WA: 2006. p. CID 61450A.

  28. SPSS Inc. SPSS 15.0 [Internet]. Chicago: 2009. Available from: http://www.spss.com

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the team that supported the performance of the study and the preparation of the article at the Innovation Center Computer Assisted Surgery, University of Leipzig: Caroline Elzner and Michael Thiele. The authors also thank the surgeons that were subject to this study for their willingness to participate. ICCAS is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and the Saxon Ministry of Science and Fine Arts (SMWK) in the scope of the Unternehmen Region with the grant numbers 03 ZIK 031 and 03 ZIK 032 and by funds of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the state of Saxony within the frame of measures to support the technology sector.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Faculty, Innovation Center Computer Assisted Surgery, Universität Leipzig, Semmelweisstr. 14, 04103, Leipzig, Germany

    Thomas Neumuth & Dayana Neumuth

  2. Department of Ophthalmology, University Medical Center, Liebigstr. 10-14, 04103, Leipzig, Germany

    Renate Wiedemann, Christian Foja, Petra Meier, Juliane Schlomberg & Peter Wiedemann

Authors
  1. Thomas Neumuth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Renate Wiedemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christian Foja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Petra Meier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Juliane Schlomberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dayana Neumuth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Peter Wiedemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Neumuth.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Neumuth, T., Wiedemann, R., Foja, C. et al. Identification of surgeon–individual treatment profiles to support the provision of an optimum treatment service for cataract patients. j ocul biol dis inform 3, 73–83 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12177-011-9058-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12177-011-9058-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation