ArticleSurgical endoscopy2016
Collaborative performance in laparoscopic teams: behavioral evidences from simulation.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Looking at Social Interactions in Medical Education with Dual Eye-Tracking Technology: A Scoping Review.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo examine the frequency of movement de-synchronization between a surgeon and assistant in a laparoscopic simulation task, and test whether it can be a valid behavior marker for team performance.
methodsFourteen subjects formed a total of 22 dyad teams. Each team performed a laparoscopic task where the camera driver navigated a laparoscope for the operator to transport a plastic cylinder between targets. Key movement landmarks were annotated from recorded surgical videos and were used to identify team behaviors and performance. Task completion time, number of movement de-synchronization, and errors (cylinder drops) were compared over 3 performance groups (elite, intermediate, poor) and 2 types of movements (on-site manipulation vs. position-shifting.
resultsTask completion time of elite teams was shorter than intermediate and poor teams (33.3 vs. 66.8 vs. 141.2 s, P < 0.001). Elite teams made fewer errors (0.1 vs. 0.5 vs. 0.9, P = 0.063) and recorded fewer numbers of de-synchronization than poor teams (2.9 vs. 3.0 vs. 4.9, P = 0.009). We also found that the on-site manipulation took longer task time (113.5 vs. 51.2 s, P < 0.001) and recorded fewer de-synchronization (0.6 vs. 5.3, P < 0.001) than position-shifting tasks. However, there is no significance in the measure of errors (P = 0.029). Interaction effects were revealed between performance groups and two movement types in task time (P = 0.010) and movement de-synchronization (P = 0.003).
conclusionsVideo analysis is a useful tool for identifying team behaviors during surgery. Movement de-synchronization between surgeons and assistant reveals team cooperation in laparoscopic procedure. The evidence where de-synchronization occurred frequently during the position-shifting tasks rather than during the on-site manipulation suggests team collaborative behaviors can be affected by different task requirements.
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.