ArticleGut and liver2019
A Newly Designed 3-Dimensional Printer-Based Gastric Hemostasis Simulator with Two Modules for Endoscopic Trainees (with Video).
Article in Gut and liver, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Forrest Classification for Bleeding Peptic Ulcer: A New Look at the Old Endoscopic Classification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: We used 3-dimensional (3D) printing technology to create a new hemostasis simulator for the stomach and investigated its efficacy and realism in endoscopic hemostasis training. Methods: A new stomach hemostasis simulator, with two hemostasis modules for hemoclipping and injection, was constructed using a 3D printer. Twenty-one endoscopists, including 11 first-year fellows (beginner group) and 10 faculty members (expert group), tested the performance of the simulator. We recorded and reviewed five training sessions and evaluated the simulator with questionnaires using a 7-point Likert scale. Results: The mean evaluation score of the expert group was 6.3±0.5 for the hemoclipping module and 6.0±0.6 for the injection module. The expert group strongly agreed that endoscopic handling in the simulator was realistic and reasonable for hemostasis training. The mean procedure time for hemoclipping was 72.7±7.1 seconds for the beginner group and 19.7±1.2 seconds for the expert group. The mean procedure time for injection was 92.1±9.8 seconds for the beginner group and 36.3±2 seconds for the expert group. The procedure time of beginner group became shorter with repetition and was significantly lower by the fifth trial. Conclusions: A new 3D-printed hemostasis simulator is capable of hemostasis training and can very effectively train beginners before they perform the procedure in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding.
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.