Clinical Trial Details
— Status: Withdrawn
Administrative data
| NCT number |
NCT04851665 |
| Other study ID # |
19-009 |
| Secondary ID |
|
| Status |
Withdrawn |
| Phase |
|
| First received |
|
| Last updated |
|
| Start date |
January 1, 2018 |
| Est. completion date |
April 10, 2021 |
Study information
| Verified date |
April 2021 |
| Source |
University of Missouri, Kansas City |
| Contact |
n/a |
| Is FDA regulated |
No |
| Health authority |
|
| Study type |
Observational
|
Clinical Trial Summary
Qualitative Review of Intraoperative teaching and learning
Description:
From manuscript draft Methods:
2.1 Setting, Participants and Data Collection In this qualitative study the investigators
examined authentic examples of intraoperative teaching exchanges between attending and
resident surgeons. These examples were taken from two previous studies conducted at a large
women's hospital: the objectives of those studies were to compare attending and resident
responses regarding avoiding intraoperative errors[31] and to develop the previously
mentioned Intelligent Cooperation framework.[10] The 10 surgical cases were gynecologic,
representing open abdominal, laparoscopic, and vaginal approaches. Surgical cases were chosen
by convenience, according to the schedule of the filmographer. Participants included ten
surgical attendings, four fellows, and eleven Obstetrics and Gynecology residents, ranging
from PGY1 to PGY4. the investigators conducted interviews with all ten attending surgeons and
five of the residents. The data for this study included the case video, deidentified
transcripts of the cases, and deidentified transcripts of the interviews. Our qualitative
approach was most informed by Sandelowski's concept of developing rich qualitative
descriptions.[32]
2.2 Research Team the investigators' interdisciplinary research team consisted of a female
pelvic surgeon with twenty years of surgical teaching experience (GS), a medical education
researcher and educational sociologist (LA), a neurosurgeon and administrator with 30 years
of experience across the continuum of medical education (SK), and a cognitive psychologist
with expertise in surgical education research (EBL).
2.3 Data Analysis the investigators reviewed and discussed the works of key sociocultural
learning scholars, as described in our Introduction. The discussions were converted into a
list of "key tenets" of the SCLTs, with associated examples from K-12 and Higher Education.
(see Table 1) the investigators then independently coded all transcripts according to the key
tenets and examples from our list, noting which exchanges reflected various sociocultural
theories. Counting themes was not part of the methodological approach in this study because
it was inconsistent with the intent of the study to develop deep, rich, and comprehensive
insights about teaching in the OR.[33] the investigators subsequently met as a group to
review coding, convert them into themes of teaching and learning advanced surgical skills,
and select notable examples from our data. (see Table 2) These themes were then transformed
into instructional strategies to improve surgical teaching, based on the sociocultural
theories. (see Table 3) Disagreements were settled by group discussion. Data saturation was
determined according to our study objective[34], to identify intraoperative instructional
strategies related to the social cultural learning theories. the investigators stopped
analyzing transcripts when the investigators had generated no new instructional strategies.
2.4 Reflexivity and Ethics During the meetings, the investigators maintained a reflexive
atmosphere, reflecting on their backgrounds, experience, and biases and how those might
affect their interpretation of the data. the investigators challenged those biases often. the
investigators reached consensus regarding differences in data interpretation through group
discussion. The University IRB approved this study as exempt.
