ArticleCureus2024
Original Training for Laparoscopic Surgery by Making an Origami Paper Crane.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Effectiveness of Origami-Box-Folding and Outside-the-Box Knot-Tying Exercises in Laparoscopic Surgical Training: A Prospective Cohort Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe training box is an effective tool used by surgical trainees. Suturing training is the common method of practicing laparoscopic surgery; however, the cost of needles and threads for long-term practice remains a problem. In this study, we incorporated the original Japanese training for laparoscopic surgery by making an origami paper crane (laparoscopic origami training (LOT)) and evaluated its effect on the clinical results as a long-term practice.
methodsLOT was performed using a single 7.5 × 7.5 cm origami paper in the training box of laparoscopic surgery. In the bench-top study, the total time required to make one paper crane was measured and evaluated, and a self-efficacy questionnaire was designed to analyze the efficacy of LOT. In clinical practice, we retrospectively compared two resident groups, one that had previously trained on LOT (trained group) and the other that did not (less-trained group), by analyzing the pneumoperitoneum time (PT) for 10 cases.
resultsAfter making paper cranes in approximately 100 cases, the making time was reduced to approximately 10 min. Long-term results analyzing up to 1500 cases revealed that in addition to shortening the time required to make a paper crane, the shape of the crane also improved. Consequently, the median PT was significantly shorter in the trained group than in the less-trained group (129.0 (62-287) versus 208.5 (127-343) min; p<0.001).
conclusionLOT contributed to introducing safe laparoscopic surgery to residents and improved their laparoscopic outcomes. We believe that this is a useful practice methodology that can be recommended to general physicians who wish to practice laparoscopic surgeries.
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.