Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24754961›Full record

Trial reportTrials2014

One or two trainees per workplace in a structured multimodality training curriculum for laparoscopic surgery? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial - DRKS00004675.

Felix Nickel, Felix Jede, Andreas Minassian, Matthias Gondan, Jonathan D Hendrie, Tobias Gehrig, Georg R Linke, Martina Kadmon, Lars Fischer, Beat P Müller-Stich

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. The Applications of Virtual Reality Technology in Medical Groups Teaching.Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism · 2018
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. [Risk awareness and training for prevention of complications in minimally invasive surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Felix Nickel
Felix Jede
Andreas Minassian
Matthias Gondan
Jonathan D Hendrie
Tobias Gehrig
Georg R Linke
Martina Kadmon
Lars Fischer
Beat P Müller-StichDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany. beat.mueller@med.uni-heidelberg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopy training courses have been established in many centers worldwide to ensure adequate skill learning before performing operations on patients. Different training modalities and their combinations have been compared regarding training effects. Multimodality training combines different approaches for optimal training outcome. However, no standards currently exist for the number of trainees assigned per workplace.

methodsThis is a monocentric, open, three-arm randomized controlled trial. The participants are laparoscopically-naive medical students from Heidelberg University. After a standardized introduction to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with online learning modules, the participants perform a baseline test for basic skills and LC performance on a virtual reality (VR) trainer. A total of 100 students will be randomized into three study arms, in a 2:2:1 ratio. The intervention groups participate individually (Group 1) or in pairs (Group 2) in a standardized and structured multimodality training curriculum. Basic skills are trained on the box and VR trainers. Procedural skills and LC modules are trained on the VR trainer. The control group (Group C) does not receive training between tests. A post-test is performed to reassess basic skills and LC performance on the VR trainer. The performance of a cadaveric porcine LC is then measured as the primary outcome using standardized and validated ratings by blinded experts with the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills. The Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Surgical skills score and the time taken for completion are used as secondary outcome measures as well as the improvement of skills and VR LC performance between baseline and post-test. Cognitive tests and questionnaires are used to identify individual factors that might exert influence on training outcome. DISCUSSION: This study aims to assess whether workplaces in laparoscopy training courses for beginners should be used by one trainee or two trainees simultaneously, by measuring the impact on operative performance and learning curves. Possible factors of influence, such as the role of observing the training partner, exchange of thoughts, active reflection, model learning, motivation, pauses, and sympathy will be explored in the data analysis. This study will help optimize the efficiency of laparoscopy training courses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00004675.

Indexed as

Internship and ResidencyResearch DesignWorkplaceAnimalsCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicClinical CompetenceCognitionComputer-Assisted InstructionComputer SimulationCurriculumEducational StatusEducation, Medical, GraduateGermanyHospitals, UniversityHumansInternet

Identifiers

PMID24754961
PMCPMC3999459

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.