Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2020
Laparoscopic Simulation in Reverse and Side Alignment Impact on Forward Alignment Performance: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transference of skills in robotic vs. laparoscopic simulation: a randomized controlled trial.BMC surgery · 2021Trial
- Initial adaptation and surgical performance of the hinotori™ robotic system among pediatric surgeons with minimal robotic exposure.Pediatric surgery international · 2025Article
- The impact of assistants' reverse alignment surgical skill proficiency on laparoscopic colorectal surgery.Annals of coloproctology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe influence of visual-spatial discordance during training on laparoscopic skills is poorly understood. It has been proposed that training in visual-spatial discordant situations can improve performance in the forward alignment, which was the basis of our hypothesis. Our study's aim was to conduct a randomized control trial to explore the impact of simulated training in visual-spatial discordant situations on forward alignment performance.
methodsThe participants were 80 medical students who were randomized into four groups. Group A served as the control and performed all peg transfers in the forward alignment. Groups B, C, and D experienced varied rounds of either increasing or decreasing sensorimotor discordance. The students were trained and tested using the peg transfer task used in the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery curriculum. Based on the group, each student performed 10 peg transfer practice rounds in their assigned alignment. After each practice session, each student was tested and scored in forward alignment performance. A baseline test, followed by three practice sessions, and three tests were done.
resultsGroup A (control) demonstrated a statistically significant overall increase in scoring of 37.1% from baseline when compared to the final test. Groups B, C, and D showed improvements of 3.7%, 27.1%, and 19.3%, respectively, between baseline and the final test, yet none demonstrated consistent linear improvements. On multi-variate analysis, students who practiced in the side or reverse alignment positions scored 25 and 37 points lower, respectively, than students who practiced in the forward alignment.
conclusionOur study suggests that training in visual-spatial discordant conditions does not lead to the development of forward alignment laparoscopic skills. This could have important implications when developing future laparoscopic skills training curriculums. To our knowledge, this is the largest study to date assessing the impacts of training in visual-spatial discordance situations on performance in the forward alignment.
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.