Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29951631›Full record

ArticleBJS open2018

Effects of transcranial direct-current stimulation on laparoscopic surgical skill acquisition.

P Ciechanski, A Cheng, O Damji, S Lopushinsky, K Hecker, Z Jadavji, A Kirton

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJS open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02756052 (Enhancing Laparoscopic Skill Acquisition and Retention With Transcranial Direct-current Stimulation), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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.

NCT02756052 nacompletednot on this map

Enhancing Laparoscopic Skill Acquisition and Retention With Transcranial Direct-current Stimulation

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of CalgaryRan2016 to 2016Enrolled48ConditionsLaparoscopic Surgical ProceduresArmsAnodal Transcranial direct-current stimulation, Sham Transcranial direct-current stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

P CiechanskiDepartment of Neuroscience University of Calgary Calgary Alberta Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7943-4631
A ChengDepartment of Pediatrics University of Calgary Calgary Alberta Canada.
O DamjiDepartment of Cumming School of Medicine University of Calgary Calgary Alberta Canada.
S LopushinskyDepartment of Surgery University of Calgary Calgary Alberta Canada.
K HeckerDepartment of Veterinary Medicine University of Calgary Calgary Alberta Canada.
Z JadavjiDepartment of Neuroscience University of Calgary Calgary Alberta Canada.
A KirtonDepartment of Pediatrics University of Calgary Calgary Alberta Canada.
University of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChanges in medical education may limit opportunities for trainees to gain proficiency in surgical skills. Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) can augment motor skill learning and may enhance surgical procedural skill acquisition. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of tDCS on simulation-based laparoscopic surgical skill acquisition.

methodsIn this double-blind, sham-controlled randomized trial, participants were randomized to receive 20 min of anodal tDCS or sham stimulation over the dominant primary motor cortex, concurrent with Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery simulation-based training. Primary outcomes of laparoscopic pattern-cutting and peg transfer tasks were scored at baseline, during repeated performance over 1 h, and again at 6 weeks. Intent-to-treat analysis examined the effects of treatment group on skill acquisition and retention.

resultsOf 40 participants, those receiving tDCS achieved higher mean(s.d.) final pattern-cutting scores than participants in the sham group (207·6(30·0) versus 186·0(32·7) respectively; P = 0·022). Scores were unchanged at 6 weeks. Effects on peg transfer scores were not significantly different (210·2(23·5) in the tDCS group versus 201·7(18·1) in the sham group; P = 0·111); the proportion achieving predetermined proficiency levels was higher for tDCS than for sham stimulation. Procedures were well tolerated with no serious adverse events and no decreases in motor measures.

conclusionThe addition of tDCS to laparoscopic surgical training may enhance skill acquisition. Trials of additional skills and translation to non-simulated performance are required to determine the potential value in medical education and impact on patient outcomes. Registration number: NCT02756052 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/).

Identifiers

PMID29951631
PMCPMC5989997
OpenAlexW2791214802

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.