Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29435758›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2018

LapTrain: multi-modality training curriculum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy-results of a randomized controlled trial.

K F Kowalewski, C R Garrow, T Proctor, A A Preukschas, M Friedrich, P C Müller, H G Kenngott, L Fischer, B P Müller-Stich, F Nickel

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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.

K F KowalewskiDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
C R GarrowDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
T ProctorInstitute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
A A PreukschasDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
M FriedrichDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
P C MüllerDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
H G KenngottDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
L FischerDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
B P Müller-StichDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
F NickelDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. felix.nickel@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID 0000-0001-6066-8238

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultiple training modalities for laparoscopy have different advantages, but little research has been conducted on the benefit of a training program that includes multiple different training methods compared to one method only. This study aimed to evaluate benefits of a combined multi-modality training program for surgical residents.

methodsLaparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) was performed on a porcine liver as the pre-test. Randomization was stratified for experience to the multi-modality Training group (12 h of training on Virtual Reality (VR) and box trainer) or Control group (no training). The post-test consisted of a VR LC and porcine LC. Performance was rated with the Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) score by blinded experts.

resultsTraining (n = 33) and Control (n = 31) were similar in the pre-test (GOALS: 13.7 ± 3.4 vs. 14.7 ± 2.6; p = 0.198; operation time 57.0 ± 18.1 vs. 63.4 ± 17.5 min; p = 0.191). In the post-test porcine LC, Training had improved GOALS scores (+ 2.84 ± 2.85 points, p < 0.001), while Control did not (+ 0.55 ± 2.34 points, p = 0.154). Operation time in the post-test was shorter for Training vs. Control (40.0 ± 17.0 vs. 55.0 ± 22.2 min; p = 0.012). Junior residents improved GOALS scores to the level of senior residents (pre-test: 13.7 ± 2.7 vs. 18.3 ± 2.9; p = 0.010; post-test: 15.5 ± 3.4 vs. 18.8 ± 3.8; p = 0.120) but senior residents remained faster (50.1 ± 20.6 vs. 25.0 ± 1.9 min; p < 0.001). No differences were found between groups on the post-test VR trainer.

conclusionsStructured multi-modality training is beneficial for novices to improve basics and overcome the initial learning curve in laparoscopy as well as to decrease operation time for LCs in different stages of experience. Future studies should evaluate multi-modality training in comparison with single modalities.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00011040.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceComputer SimulationCurriculumAdultCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicEducation, Medical, GraduateFemaleGeneral SurgeryHumansInternship and ResidencyLearning CurveMaleCurriculumEducationGOALSLaparoscopic cholecystectomyLaparoscopyTraining

Identifiers

PMID29435758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.