Alexander Beulens

69 Training novice robot surgeons: Proctoring provides same results as simulator-generated guidance Results A total of 70 participants were included in the study. The post intervention data of three partici-pants were lost due to a malfunction of the software (two from the non-guidance group and one from the SGG group). In some variables data of participants were missing in either pre- or post-intervention results (appendix 2), these missing data points were evenly distributed among the groups. The baseline characteristics of the participants are displayed in Table 1. There was no differ-ence in RAS experience between the groups (22 vs 23 vs 22, p=1). The majority of the participants were female reflecting the growing number of female medical students and young physicians in the Netherlands (48 vs 29 p=0.148). Most of the participants were medical students (n=49), followed by PhD candidates (n=13) and residents (n=5). There were no PhD candidates in the no guidance group (0 vs 8 and 5, p=0,005), while most of the medical students were randomly assigned to the no guid-ance group (22 vs 13 and 14, p=0,005). In the simulation trained group more participants had pre-vious laparoscopic surgery experience compared to the remaining groups (15 vs 6 and 6, p=0,004). Pre-intervention vesicourethral anastomosis simulation exercise scores. The results of the pre-intervention vesicourethral anastomosis simulation exercise showed an overall difference between the three groups in the number of times the tissue was grasped (p=0,018) and in the number of unnecessary needle piercing points (p=0,021) (figure 4a, 4b). However, no statistical significative differences were found Figure 4: Box and Whisker plots show significant differences in the pre-intervention simulation scores between the study groups. A) number of times the tissue was grasped (p=0,018), B) number of unnecessary needle piercing points (0,021). a b