ArticleIrish journal of medical science2016
Homemade laparoscopic surgical simulator: a cost-effective solution to the challenge of acquiring laparoscopic skills?
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A 3D-Printed, High-Fidelity Pelvis Training Model: Cookbook Instructions and First Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Construct Validity and Experience of Using a Low-cost Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery Simulator.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2023Article
- Development and Validation of a Homemade, Low-Cost Laparoscopic Simulator for Resident Surgeons (LABOT).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Novel Education and Simulation Tools in Urologic Training.Current urology reports · 2019Review
- Homemade laparoscopic simulator.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic surgery is well known to have a long and variable learning curve and there is a potential benefit from earlier integration of laparoscopic skills in medical education.
aimsThe aim of this study was to assess the challenges facing surgical trainees regarding the acquisition of laparoscopic skills and second to assess their opinion regarding the use of a homemade laparoscopic surgical simulator.
methodsA homemade laparoscopic surgical simulator (HLSS) was constructed. An online survey using Survey Monkey
resultsAll trainees (n = 34) responded to the survey. No trainee had full-time access to a laparoscopic box trainer. The mean time spent per week using the simulator was 0.38 h (range 0-3 h), with 61.8 % (n = 21) reporting not using the simulator at all. 94.1 % (n = 32) enrolled in our study. 90.6 % (n = 29) found the HLSS easy to use compared to 93.8 % (n = 30) with the CLS (p = 1.00). 96.9 % (n = 31) reported an overall satisfaction with the HLSS. There was no difference with regard to the completing the tasks: peg transfer (78.1 vs 78.1 %, p = 1.00), cutting patterns (65.6 vs 71.9 %, p = 0.788) or knot tying (12.5 vs 18.8 %, p = 0.732) whether using HLSS and the CLS.
conclusionHomemade laparoscopic surgical simulators are easy to construct, affordable, usable and of interest to trainees.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26377602What 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.