Learning Curves in Laparoscopic Training: Comparative Analysis of Two Training Models
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/JEHS.2025.80.59449Keywords
laparoscopy, learning curve, simulation training, surgical education, studentsAbstract
Introduction: Laparoscopic surgery is widely used due to its minimal invasiveness, shorter recovery times, and improved patient outcomes. However, it demands advanced psychomotor skills, such as spatial awareness, precision movements, and hand-eye coordination. Mastering these skills requires structured and effective training strategies. Developing and maintaining laparoscopic proficiency is essential for medical students preparing for clinical practice.
Purpose: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intensive and distributed laparoscopic training models in developing and retaining laparoscopic surgical skills among medical students.
Materials and Methods: A prospective study was conducted from July to December 2024, involving 10 medical students (6 females, 4 males, aged 20-26 years) with no prior laparoscopic experience. Participants were divided into two training groups: intensive (daily sessions over 10 days) or distributed (twice weekly sessions over 5 weeks). Training included standardized exercises (peg transfer, circle cutting, needle guidance, ball allocation) using the Laparo Advance box trainer with E-BLUS-modified protocols. Performance was evaluated based on task completion times and errors, with follow-up assessments one month post-training.
Results: Both training models improved laparoscopic skills, but the distributed group showed superior skill retention and consistency. One month follow-up evaluations showed significantly shorter task times completion in the distributed group for peg transfer (p=0.014, d=1.97) and cutting a circle (p=0.036, d=1.74).
Conclusions: Distributed training demonstrated superiority in skill retention, error reduction, and consistent task performance, especially in tasks requiring precision. These findings support integrating distributed training into laparoscopic education to improve skill acquisition and better prepare trainees for clinical practice.
References
1.Jaschinski T, Mosch CG, Eikermann M, Neugebauer EA, Sauerland S. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;11:CD001546.
2.Buia A, Stockhausen F, Hanisch E. Laparoscopic surgery: A qualified systematic review. World J Methodol. 2015;5:238-54.
3.Torricelli FCM, Barbosa JABA, Marchini GS. Impact of laparoscopic surgery training laboratory on surgeon’s performance. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;8(11):735-41.
4.Charokar K, Modi J. Simulation-based structured training for developing laparoscopy skills in general surgery and obstetrics & gynecology postgraduates. J Educ Health Promot. 2021;10:387.
5.Korndorffer JR, Hayes DJ, Dunne JB, Sierra R, Touchard CL, Scott DJ. Development and transferability of a cost-effective laparoscopic camera navigation simulator. Surg Endosc. 2005;19(1):161-7.
6.Schwab B, Hungness E, Barsness KA, McGaghie WC. The role of simulation in surgical education. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2017;27(5):450-4.
7.Lateef F. Simulation-based learning: Just like the real thing. J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2010;3(4):348-52.
8.von Bechtolsheim F, Petzsch S, Schmidt S, Weitz J, Distler M, Lauscher JC. Does practice make perfect? Laparoscopic training mainly improves motion efficiency: a prospective trial. Updates Surg. 2023;75(5):1103-15.
9.Kunert W, Storz P, Dietz N, Axt S, Falch C, Kirschniak A. Learning curves, potential and speed in training of laparoscopic skills: a randomised comparative study in a box trainer. Surg Endosc. 2021;35(7):3303-12.
10.Hopper AN, Jamison MH, Lewis WG. Learning curves in surgical practice. Postgrad Med J. 2007;83(986):777-9.
11.LAPARO Medical Simulators [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2024]. Available from: https://laparosimulators.com
12.European Association of Urology. Laparoscopy training [Internet]. [cited 2024]. Available from: https://uroweb.org/education-events/laparoscopy
13.Peláez Mata D, Herrero Álvarez S, Gómez Sánchez A, Pérez Egido L, Corona Bellostas C, de Agustín Asensio JC. Laparoscopic learning curves. Cir Pediatr. 2021;34(1):20-7.
14.Spruit EN, Band GPH, Hamming JF. Increasing efficiency of surgical training: effects of spacing practice on skill acquisition and retention in laparoscopy training. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(8):2235-43.
15.Porpiglia F, Fiori C, Bertolo R, Manfredi M, Mele F, Checcucci E, et al. Five-year outcomes for a prospective randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus. 2018;4(1):80-6.
16.De Groote R, Puliatti S, Amato M, Mazzone E, Dell’Oglio P, Rosiello G, et al. Proficiency-based progression training for robotic surgery skills training: a randomized clinical trial. BJU Int. 2022;130(4):528-35.
17.Jørgensen HK, Vamadevan A, Konge L, Hertz P, Bjerrum F. Distributed training vs. massed practice for surgical skills training—a systematic review. Surg Endosc. 2024; [Epub ahead of print].
18.Mitchell EL, Lee DY, Sevdalis N, Partsafas AW, Landry GJ, Liem TK, et al. Evaluation of distributed practice schedules on retention of a newly acquired surgical skill: a randomized trial. Am J Surg. 2011;201(1):31-9.
19.Spruit EN, Band GPH, Hamming JF, Ridderinkhof KR. Optimal training design for procedural motor skills: a review and application to laparoscopic surgery. Psychol Res. 2014;78(6):878-91.
20.Shaker D. Cognitivism and psychomotor skills in surgical training: from theory to practice. Int J Med Educ. 2018;9:253-4.
21.Korman M, Doyon J, Doljansky J, Carrier J, Dagan Y, Karni A. Daytime sleep condenses the time course of motor memory consolidation. Nat Neurosci. 2007;10(9):1206-13.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Layla Settaf-Cherif, Adam Ostrowski, Anmol Khan, Katarzyna Malinowska, Oliwia Kwiatkowska, Łukasz Paszylk, Jan Adamowicz, Tomasz Drewa

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The periodical offers access to content in the Open Access system under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 68
Number of citations: 0