ArticleHeliyon2024
Multi-center evaluation of the first, low-cost, open source and totally 3D-printed pediatric laparoscopic trainer.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study created and evaluated the face validity of a novel, low-cost, three-dimensional printed pediatric laparoscopic trainer and compared it to a standard laparoscopic trainer (LT). Design: We developed the Space Child Laparoscopic Trainer (SCLT) using fused deposition modeling technology with a Bambulab P1S 3D printer.The cost per unit was five euros and the assembly time was 10 min. The printing time was 543 min for 434 g of polylactic acid filament (PLA). A smartphone was used as the camera.The performance of experienced surgeons and surgical residents was evaluated on SCLT and LT using the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill score (OSATS) and time spent. Two fundamental laparoscopic tasks, peg transfer and precision cutting, were randomly performed by each trainer. Participant satisfaction was assessed using a questionnaire. This study assessed the learning speed of surgical residents using the SCLT compared to a standard LT through a non-inferiority test. The test results were compared with those of a control group of experienced senior surgeons. Setting: A medical training program was set up for first-year surgery residents from different French cities (Rouen, Caen, Amiens, and Lille) at the Medical Training Center of Rouen, in collaboration with the University Hospital of Rouen. Participants: Ten pediatric surgeons with at least ten years of experience in laparoscopic surgery, 51 first-year surgical residents, and six external evaluators with at least five years of laparoscopic experience. Results: In total, 200 exercises were performed by 50 residents. The estimated learning speed was +0.139 (95 % confidence interval [CI]: +0.053-+0.252, p = 0.01) for LT and +0.153 (95%CI: +0.035-+0.243, p = 0.004) for SCLT. The estimated learning speed ratio for the SCLT compared to that for the LT was 1.10 (95%CI: 0.35-3.46, p = 0.09 for non-inferiority to 0.50). Conclusions: The results demonstrated a similar performance between the SCLT and standard LT for resident training in pediatric surgery. The widespread dissemination of this tool to residents and surgeons, especially in developing countries, may allow easier access to laparoscopic training.
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.