Trial reportLangenbeck's archives of surgery2017
Training or non-surgical factors-what determines a good surgical performance? A randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring "Talent" in Medical Education: A Scoping Review.Perspectives on medical education · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of an inexpensive short-term theoretical-practical course on videosurgery for surgeons in training.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Effect of brain alpha oscillation on the performance in laparoscopic skills simulator training.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- The Selection of Main Surgical Work Factors in Operating Rooms.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcquiring laparoscopic skills is a necessity for every young surgeon. Whether it is a talent or a non-surgical skill that determines the surgical performance of an endoscopic operation has been discussed for years. In other disciplines aptitude testing has become the norm. Airlines, for example, have implemented assessments to test the natural aptitude of future pilots to predict their performance later on. In the medical field, especially surgery, there are no similar comparable tests implemented or even available. This study investigates the influence of potential factors that may predict the successful performance of a complex laparoscopic operation, such as the surgeon's age, gender or learning method.
methodsThis study focussed 70 surgical trainees. It was designed as a secondary analysis of data derived from a 2 × 2 factorial randomised controlled trial of practical training and/or multimedia training (four groups) in an experimental exercise. Both before and then after the training sessions, the participating trainees performed a laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a pelvitrainer. Surgical performance was then evaluated using a modified objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS). Participants were classified as 'Skilled' (high score in the pre-test), 'Good Learner' (increase from pre- to post-test) or 'Others' based on the OSATS results. Based on the results of the recorded performance, the training methods as well as non-surgical skills were eventually evaluated in a univariate and in a multivariate analysis.
resultsIn the pre-training performance 11 candidates were categorised as 'Skilled' (15.7%), 35 participants as 'Good Learners' (50.0%) and 24 participants were classified as 'Others'. The univariate analysis showed that the age, a residency in visceral surgery, and participation in a multimedia training were significantly associated with this grouping. Multivariate analyses revealed that residency in visceral surgery was the most predictive factor for the 'Skilled' participants (p = 0.059), and multimedia training was most predictive for the 'Good Learner' (p = 0.006). Participants in the group of 'Others' who were neither 'Skilled' nor improved in the training phase were younger (p = 0.011) and did not receive multimedia (p < 0.001) or practical (p = 0.025) training.
conclusionThe type of learning method has been shown to be the most effective factor to improve laparoscopic skills, with multimedia training proving to be more effective than practical training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28238058What 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.