Explainable AI for Automated User-specific Feedback in Surgical Skill Acquisition

TL;DR

This study evaluates the effectiveness of explainable AI-generated feedback in surgical training, demonstrating improved cognitive load and confidence among trainees, and exploring its potential to enhance self-directed learning and skill acquisition.

Contribution

It introduces a novel XAI-based framework for providing personalized, actionable feedback in surgical skill training, bridging the gap between automated assessment and effective learning guidance.

Findings

XAI feedback improved trainees' confidence and cognitive load.

No significant difference in performance gap reduction between XAI and traditional feedback.

Trends suggest XAI may help trainees better mimic expert practices.

Abstract

Traditional surgical skill acquisition relies heavily on expert feedback, yet direct access is limited by faculty availability and variability in subjective assessments. While trainees can practice independently, the lack of personalized, objective, and quantitative feedback reduces the effectiveness of self-directed learning. Recent advances in computer vision and machine learning have enabled automated surgical skill assessment, demonstrating the feasibility of automatic competency evaluation. However, it is unclear whether such Artificial Intelligence (AI)-driven feedback can contribute to skill acquisition. Here, we examine the effectiveness of explainable AI (XAI)-generated feedback in surgical training through a human-AI study. We create a simulation-based training framework that utilizes XAI to analyze videos and extract surgical skill proxies related to primitive actions. Our intervention provides automated, user-specific feedback by comparing trainee performance to expert benchmarks and highlighting deviations from optimal execution through understandable proxies for actionable guidance. In a prospective user study with medical students, we compare the impact of XAI-guided feedback against traditional video-based coaching on task outcomes, cognitive load, and trainees' perceptions of AI-assisted learning. Results showed improved cognitive load and confidence post-intervention. While no differences emerged between the two feedback types in reducing performance gaps or practice adjustments, trends in the XAI group revealed desirable effects where participants more closely mimicked expert practice. This work encourages the study of explainable AI in surgical education and the development of data-driven, adaptive feedback mechanisms that could transform learning experiences and competency assessment.