Trial reportBMC medical education2025
Study on the application of progressive training method combined with imagery training method in laparoscopic suturing skills training for resident physicians.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to explore an efficient teaching method to improve laparoscopic suturing skills in resident physicians by combining the progressive training method with the imagery training method.
methodsThis study used a randomized controlled trial methodology. The experimental group received training utilizing a combination of the progressive training method and the imagery training method In contrast, the control group followed the traditional teaching method of practicing continuous complete actions. Both groups were trained in intracorporeal suturing and knot-tying under laparoscopy. The training effects of the two groups were compared and analyzed before and after the training, including LS-CAT scores and suturing time.
resultsIn the second test, the experimental group had much higher LS-CAT scores than the control group, as well as a considerably lower number of operation errors. In the experimental group, 88.9% of the trainees were proficient, compared to only 28.6% in the control group. There was no significant difference in suturing time between the two groups. The results of the third test indicated that, although there were no significant differences in LS-CAT total scores or suturing time between the two groups, the experimental group demonstrated a significantly lower number of operational errors compared to the control group. Additionally, the LS-CAT scores for tissue handling in the experimental group were significantly better than those in the control group.
conclusionThe combination of the progressive training method and the imagery training method significantly improved resident physicians' laparoscopic suturing skills. This method greatly enhanced the efficiency and quality of learning laparoscopic suturing and knot-tying skills among surgical and gynecological resident doctors.
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.