Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34981231›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2022

Merged virtual reality teaching of the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

Bryce Lowry, Garrett G R J Johnson, Ashley Vergis

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Artificial Intelligence in the Training of Radiology Residents: a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2025
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. [Construction and Exploration of Simulative Virtual Curriculum of Laparoscopy for Standardized Surgical Residency Training].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2023
    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

3 authors.

Bryce LowryUniversity of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
Garrett G R J JohnsonGeneral Surgery Residency and Clinician Investigator Program, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
Ashley VergisSt. Boniface General Hospital, University of Manitoba, Z3039-409 Tache Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R2H 2A6, Canada. ashleyvergis@yahoo.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic challenges our ability to provide surgical education, as our ability to gather and train together has been restricted due to safety concerns. However, the importance of quality surgical education has remained. High-fidelity simulation platforms have been developed that merge virtual reality video streams to allow for remote instruction and collaboration. This study sought to validate the use of a merged virtual reality (MVR) platform for the instruction and assessment of the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery (FLS) skills.

methodsThis was a prospective randomized controlled non-inferiority study. Thirty participants were randomized between three groups: The standard group received in-person instruction and expert feedback, the experimental group received identical training via the MVR platform, and the control group practiced on their own, but received no feedback. All participants were pre-tested for baseline performance at the beginning of the study. Change in performance was evaluated immediately after training and one month later for retention. Ordinary one-way analysis of variance was used to evaluate the effects of time, group, and time-on-group.

resultsThe pre-test confirmed baseline homogeneity between the groups. MVR was non-inferior to standard in-person training for total FLS times on either the post-test (p = 0.632) or the retention test (p = 0.829). Performance was also identical between MVR and standard training groups for each of the individual FLS tasks. Each group improved significantly in nearly all tasks after practice; however, the standard and MVR training groups both improved significantly more than controls for the ligating loop, extracorporeal suturing, intracorporeal suturing, and total FLS task training but did not reach statistical significance for peg transfer and pattern cut tasks.

conclusionThis randomized, controlled trial has demonstrated the use of an MVR platform as non-inferior to in-person instruction for the FLS program, forming the foundation for future work on remote instruction and collaboration.

Indexed as

COVID-19LaparoscopyVirtual RealityClinical CompetenceHumansPandemicsProspective StudiesLaparoscopic surgerySurgical educationVirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID34981231
PMCPMC8722746

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.