Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32289719›Full record

Trial reportBrain stimulation

Utilizing transcranial direct current stimulation to enhance laparoscopic technical skills training: A randomized controlled trial.

Morgan L Cox, Zhi-De Deng, Hannah Palmer, Amanda Watts, Lysianne Beynel, Jonathan R Young, Sarah H Lisanby, John Migaly, Lawrence G Appelbaum

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Brain stimulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03083483 (Utilizing Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation to Enhance Laparoscopic Technical Skills Training), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

NCT03083483 nacompletednot on this map

Utilizing Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation to Enhance Laparoscopic Technical Skills Training

TypeinterventionalSponsorDuke UniversityRan2017 to 2017Enrolled71ConditionsHealthy VolunteersArmstranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Morgan L CoxDepartment of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. Electronic address: morgan.cox@duke.edu.
Zhi-De DengDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA; Noninvasive Neuromodulation Unit, Experimental Therapeutics and Pathophysiology Branch, Intramural Research Program, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Hannah PalmerDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Amanda WattsDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Lysianne BeynelDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Jonathan R YoungDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Sarah H LisanbyDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA; Noninvasive Neuromodulation Unit, Experimental Therapeutics and Pathophysiology Branch, Intramural Research Program, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
John MigalyDepartment of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Lawrence G AppelbaumDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Duke University · USNational Institutes of Health · US

Funding

Non-invasive Neuromodulation Unit (NNU)ZIAMH002955 · NIMH · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH · PI ZARATE, CARLOS · 2016 to 2025
$40.3M
Postdoctoral Training in Cardiovascular Clinical ResearchT32HL069749 · NHLBI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI MARK, DANIEL B · 2003 to 2023
$6.7M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 MH999999Intramural NIH HHS ZIA MH002955NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL069749
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that delivers constant, low electrical current resulting in changes to cortical excitability. Prior work suggests it may enhance motor learning giving it the potential to augment surgical technical skill acquisition.

objectivesThe aim of this study was to test the efficacy of tDCS, coupled with motor skill training, to accelerate laparoscopic skill acquisition in a pre-registered (NCT03083483), double-blind and placebo-controlled study. We hypothesized that relative to sham tDCS, active tDCS would accelerate the development of laparoscopic technical skills, as measured by the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) Peg Transfer task quantitative metrics.

methodsIn this study, sixty subjects (mean age 22.7 years with 42 females) were randomized into sham or active tDCS in either bilateral primary motor cortex (bM1) or supplementary motor area (SMA) electrode configurations. All subjects practiced the FLS Peg Transfer Task during six 20-min training blocks, which were preceded and followed by a single trial pre-test and post-test. The primary outcome was changes in laparoscopic skill performance over time, quantified by group differences in completion time from pre-test to post-test and learning curves developed from a calculated score accounting for errors.

resultsLearning curves calculated over the six 20-min training blocks showed significantly greater improvement in performance for the bM1 group than the sham group (t = 2.07, p = 0.039), with the bM1 group achieving approximately the same amount of improvement in 4 blocks compared to the 6 blocks required of the sham group. The SMA group also showed greater mean improvement than sham, but exhibited more variable learning performance and differences relative to sham were not significant (t = 0.85, p = 0.400). A significant main effect was present for pre-test versus post-test times (F = 133.2, p < 0.001), with lower completion times at post-test, however these did not significantly differ for the training groups.

conclusionLaparoscopic skill training with active bilateral tDCS exhibited significantly greater learning relative to sham. The potential for tDCS to enhance the training of surgical skills, therefore, merits further investigation to determine if these preliminary results may be replicated and extended.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceAdolescentAdultCortical ExcitabilityDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansLaparoscopyLearningMaleMotor CortexMotor SkillsTranscranial Direct Current StimulationYoung AdultBilateral motor cortexFLS Peg transfer taskSupplementary motor areaTranscranial direct current stimulationVisual-motor learning

Identifiers

PMID32289719
PMCPMC8474665
OpenAlexW3012292262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.