ArticleUpdates in surgery2021
Surgical coaching applied to laparoscopic TME for continuous professional development in rectal surgery: proof of concept.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCoaching is maturing as a strategy for surgeons' continuous professional development in different types of surgery. Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LAP TME) is one of the recognized difficult procedures in colorectal surgery. Aim of this trial is to introduce the surgical coaching as a tool for a continuous technical education of LAP TME for cancer in a consultant surgeon carrier.
methodsTwelve Italian colorectal surgeons were enrolled as trainees in the AIMS Academy rectal cancer surgical coaching project and attended a face-to-face 90-min surgical coaching on a pre-edited 45-min-long video of a laparoscopic proctectomy according to pre-determined guidelines. At the end of the coaching, all mentors were asked to fill a questionnaire evaluating the trainee's skills. All trainees had to fill a post-coaching questionnaire addressing the appropriateness of the coaching with respect to their actual level.
resultsTrainees were more confident in performing the extra-pelvic part of the surgical procedures compared to the intra-pelvic dissection. The most challenging steps according to the trainees were the seminal vesicles identification and the pelvic floor dissection. Mentors found the trainees quite confident in the approach to the vascular structures, lymphadenectomy, stapler utilization and bleeding control. The sharpness and the efficacy of the dissection, the dissection of the surgical planes and the anastomosis fashioning were reported at a lower level of confidence. The higher grade of satisfaction reported by the trainee came from the attention that the mentors demonstrated towards them, from the availability of the mentors to take into consideration the surgical issues raised and from the willingness to apply the suggestions received during their next proctectomies.
conclusionsThe surgical coaching applied to LAP TME should be considered as an innovative tool for continuous professional development.
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.