Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32743896›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association2020

Development and validation of a porcine organ model for training in essential laparoscopic surgical skills.

Madoka Higuchi, Takashige Abe, Kiyohiko Hotta, Ken Morita, Haruka Miyata, Jun Furumido, Naoya Iwahara, Masafumi Kon, Takahiro Osawa, Ryuji Matsumoto and 9 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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.

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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Hemorrhaging laparoscopic partial nephrectomy - feasibility of a novel simulation model.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
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

19 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Madoka HiguchiDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Takashige AbeDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Kiyohiko HottaDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Ken MoritaDepartment of Urology, Kushiro City General Hospital, Kushiro, Hokkaido, Japan.
Haruka MiyataDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Jun FurumidoDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Naoya IwaharaDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Masafumi KonDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Takahiro OsawaDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Ryuji MatsumotoDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Hiroshi KikuchiDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Yo KurashimaHokkaido University Clinical Simulation Center, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Sachiyo MuraiDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Abdullatif AydinDivision of Transplantation, Immunology and Mucosal Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Nicholas RaisonDivision of Transplantation, Immunology and Mucosal Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Kamran AhmedDivision of Transplantation, Immunology and Mucosal Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Muhammad Shamim KhanDivision of Transplantation, Immunology and Mucosal Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Prokar DasguptaDivision of Transplantation, Immunology and Mucosal Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Nobuo ShinoharaDepartment of Urology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Hokkaido University · JPKing's College London · GBHokkaido University of Science · JPKushiro City General Hospital · JP

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) KAKENHI 17K08897Mitsui Life Social Welfare Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo develop a wet laboratory training model for learning core laparoscopic surgical skills and evaluating learners' competency level outside the operating room.

methodsParticipants completed three tasks (task 1: tissue dissection around the aorta; task 2: tissue dissection and division of the renal artery; task 3: renal parenchymal closure). Each performance was video recorded and subsequently evaluated by two experts, according to the Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills and task-specific metrics that we developed (Assessment Sheet of Laparoscopic Skills in Wet Lab score). Mean scores were used for analyses. The subjective mental workload was also assessed (NASA Task Load Index).

resultsThe 54 participants included 32 urologists, eight young trainees and 14 medical students. A total of 13 participants were categorized as experts (≥50 laparoscopic surgeries), eight as intermediates (10-49) and 33 as novices (0-9). There were significant differences in the Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills and Assessment Sheet of Laparoscopic Skills in Wet Lab scores among the three groups in all three tasks. Higher NASA Task Load Index scores were observed in novices, and there were significant differences in tasks 1 (Kruskal-Wallis test, P = 0.0004) and 2 (P = 0.0002), and marginal differences in task 3 (P = 0.0745) among the three groups.

conclusionsOur training model has good construct validity, and differences in the NASA Task Load Index score reflect previous laparoscopic surgical experiences. Our findings show the ability to assess both laparoscopic surgical skills and mental workloads, which could help educators comprehend trainees' level outside the operating room. Given the decreasing opportunity to carry out pure laparoscopic surgeries because of the dissemination of robotic surgery, especially in urology, our model can offer practical training opportunities.

Indexed as

Internship and ResidencyLaparoscopySimulation TrainingUrologyAnimalsClinical CompetenceHumansSwineanimal organslaparoscopic surgerysimulationsurgical educationwet lab training

Identifiers

PMID32743896
PMCPMC7589398
OpenAlexW3047040692

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.