Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2012
Comparison of laparoscopic skills performance between single-site access (SSA) devices and an independent-port SSA approach.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic surgical box model training for surgical trainees with no prior laparoscopic experience.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- [Single incision laparoscopy : Current status].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2017Review
- Comparison of robotic and laparoendoscopic single-site surgery systems in a suturing and knot tying task.Surgical endoscopy · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study compared the performance of validated laparoscopic tasks on four commercially available single-site-access (SSA) devices with the performance of those tasks on an independent-port (IP) SSA setup.
methodsA prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic skills performance on four access devices (ADs) (GelPOINT, SILS Port, SSL Access System, TriPort) and one IP-SSA setup was conducted. A laparoscopic trainer box was used to train 18 (2nd- to 4th-year) medical students, four surgical residents, and five attending surgeons to proficiency in multiport laparoscopy using four laparoscopic drills (i.e., peg transfer, bean drop, pattern cutting, extracorporeal suturing). Drills then were performed in random order on each IP-SSA and AD-SSA setup using straight laparoscopic instruments. Repetitions were timed and errors recorded. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical analysis was performed by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey HSD post hoc tests.
resultsThe attending surgeons had significantly faster total task times than the residents or students (P < 0.001), but the difference between the residents and students was not significant. Pair-wise comparisons showed significantly faster total task times for the IP-SSA setup than for all four AD-SSAs within the student group only (P < 0.05). The total task times for the residents and attending surgeons showed a similar profile, but the differences were not significant. When the data for the three groups were combined, the total task time was less for the IP-SSA setup than for each of the four AD-SSA setups (P < 0.001). Similarly, the IP-SSA setup was significantly faster than three of the four AD-SSA setups for peg transfer, three of the four setups for pattern cutting, and two of the four setups for suturing. No significant differences in error rates between the IP-SSA and AD-SSA setups were detected.
conclusionsCompared with an IP-SSA laparoscopic setup, AD-SSAs are associated with longer task performance times in a trainer box model, independently of the level of training. Task performance was similar across the different SSA devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.