ArticleSurgical endoscopy2017
Face validity of the pulsatile organ perfusion trainer for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of animal organ models in laparoscopic surgery training: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Telestration with augmented reality improves surgical performance through gaze guidance.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Trial
- Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is superior to laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the initial training for surgical novices in an ex vivo porcine model: a randomized crossover study.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Trial
- One or two trainees per workplace for laparoscopic surgery training courses: results from a randomized controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Trial
- Does rating with a checklist improve the effect of E-learning for cognitive and practical skills in bariatric surgery? A rater-blinded, randomized-controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Trial
- LapTrain: multi-modality training curriculum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy-results of a randomized controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Trial
- Comparison of 3D-Printed Patient Model Versus Animal Cadaveric Model in Periodontal Surgery Block Course-What Is More Feasible for Beginners? A Pilot Study.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Article
- Objective assessment for open surgical suturing training by finger tracking can discriminate novices from experts.Medical education online · 2023Article
- A novel ex vivo perfusion-based mandibular pig model for dental product testing and training.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Surgical Performance Is Not Negatively Impacted by Wearing a Commercial Full-Face Mask with Ad Hoc 3D-Printed Filter Connection as a Substitute for Personal Protective Equipment during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Randomized Controlled Cross-Over Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Conception of the Lübeck Toolbox curriculum for basic minimally invasive surgery skills.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2018Article
- Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial on a multimodal training curriculum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy - LapTrain.International journal of surgery protocols · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe pulsatile organ perfusion (POP) trainer provides training of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with real instruments and cadaveric organs. It provides training of full procedures with simulation of bleeding. Although widely used, the face validity has not yet been evaluated. This study aimed to establish face validity of the POP trainer for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and its usefulness compared with other training modalities. MATERIALS AND
methodsDuring MIS courses, the participants (n = 52) used the POP trainer to perform LC. Face validity was assessed with questionnaires for realism and usefulness on a five-point Likert scale. Participants were divided into two groups: experts (n = 15) who had performed more than 50 laparoscopic procedures and novices (n = 37) with less than 50 procedures. Secondary aims included the ranking of training modalities, as well as exploration of their specific advantages and disadvantages.
resultsThe POP trainer was found to be realistic (3.8 ± 0.9) and useful (4.6 ± 0.9). Differences between experts and novices were only found for "The training modality resembles reality" (3.1 ± 0.8 vs. 3.8 ± 0.7; p = 0.010), "The operation on the POP trainer is realistic" (3.4 ± 1.1 vs. 4.5 ± 0.8; p = 0.003), and "It would be desirable to have a POP trainer at my own hospital" (4.2 ± 1.1 vs. 4.8 ± 0.8; p = 0.040). In the ranking, the animal training (1.1 ± 0.3) placed first, the POP trainer (2.3 ± 0.9) second, and the VR trainer (2.8 ± 0.9) and box trainer (2.8 ± 1.1) third. The realistic simulation of animal training was named as an advantage most often, while the unrealistic simulation of the VR trainer was the most often named disadvantage.
conclusionsThe POP trainer was rated a highly realistic and useful training modality with face validity for LC. Differences between experts and novices existed concerning realism and desirability. Future studies should evaluate the POP trainer for more advanced surgical procedures. The POP trainer widens the spectrum of modalities for training of MIS in a safe environment outside the operating room.
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.