ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2024
"Self-Designed Simulation-Based Laparoscopic Training Program for Urology Residents: Results After 6 Years of Experience".
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2024. 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.
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
Introduction: Learning laparoscopy (LAP) is challenging and requires different skills to conventional open surgery. There is a recognized need for a standardized laparoscopic training framework within urology to overcome these difficulties and to shift learning curve from patient to skills laboratory. Simulation-based training has been widely commented, but implementation in real day practice is lacking. We present our "LAP training program for residents". Material: Between 2017 and 2022, 11 residents participated in our self-designed program: Theoretical: (Moodle platform) basic knowledge and multimedia content for initiation into LAP. Evaluated through online exam. Practical: exercises for LAP skills acquisition were proposed and encouraged residents' practice in a box trainer available and experimental surgery sessions on a porcine model. On-site E-BLUS (European Basic Laparoscopic Urologic Skills) examination was performed annually. Feedback was obtained through an anonymous online survey. Results: All residents positively evaluated the program. Theoretical: 82% passed the online exam. The most valued topics: LAP in special clinical situations, complications, instruments, and configuration of the operating room (OR). Practical: all residents increased dry-lab box practices. A total of 23 experimental surgical sessions were carried out. For 64%, simulation in the experimental OR was a necessary complement to achieve laparoscopic skills and allowed them to feel more confident. Forty-five percent considered it essential to improve their surgical technique. E-BLUS evaluation was valued as a means to achieve dexterity and safer surgery by 90%. Reduction in time and errors were observed through time, although only 2 passed the E-BLUS. Conclusion: Our program for learning LAP includes the acquisition of knowledge, training of basic skills and surgical technique in a safe environment, as well as an objective evaluation. Encouraged practice of basic skills and surgical technique simulation and improved objective evaluation. It is structured, reproducible, systematic and has been positively valued, although it requires commitment for success.
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.