ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2023
A randomized study on the value of self-directed versus traditional mentor-led microsurgical training.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2023. 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.
- A randomized study on the value of self-directed versus traditional mentor-led microsurgical training.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Analyze efficacy of self-directed resident microvascular training versus a mentor-led course. Study Design: Randomized, single-blinded cohort study. Setting: Academic tertiary care center. Methods: Sixteen resident and fellow participants were randomized into two groups stratified by training year. Group A completed a self-directed microvascular course with instructional videos and self-directed lab sessions. Group B completed a traditional mentor-led microvascular course. Both groups spent equal time in the lab. Video recorded pre and post-course microsurgical skill assessments were performed to assess the efficacy of the training. Two microsurgeons, blinded to participant identity, evaluated the recordings and inspected each microvascular anastomosis (MVA). Videos were scored using an objective-structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS), a global rating scale (GRS), and quality of anastomosis scoring (QoA). Results: The pre-course assessment identified that the groups were well matched with only "Economy of Motion" on the GRS favoring the mentor led group ( Conclusion: Different microsurgical training models have previously been validated as effective methods for improved MVA performance. Our findings indicate that a self-directed microsurgical training model is an effective alternative to a traditional mentor driven models. Level of Evidence: Level 2.
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.