ArticleThe Laryngoscope2025
Feedback Enhances Training and Elicits Biometric Responses in Novel Flexible Nasolaryngoscopy Model.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2025. 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
Abstract
objectivesTo demonstrate the feasibility and impact of auditory feedback in flexible fiberoptic nasolaryngoscopy (FNL) training with a novel model incorporating audio triggers based on known anatomical loci of negative patient feedback.
methodsThis proof-of-concept study used a CT-based 3D-printed and silicone-casted model of nares to mainstem bronchi to teach FNL during an otolaryngology simulation training. The spatially tracked laryngoscope tip triggered simulated responses (pain, gag, cough) when co-localized to specific anatomic landmarks: the nasal septum, epiglottis, and trachea. Participants wearing heart rate (HR) monitors completed three FNL trials, two without and one with auditory patient responses. Outcomes, stratified by prior trainee experience, included participant HR, survey-based changes in confidence, and assessment of auditory feedback utility.
resultsTwenty-nine trainees ranging from medical students to fourth-year otolaryngology residents rated model realism and tactile experience 7.4 ± 1.6 and 6.9 ± 2.2, respectively, on a 10-point Likert scale (mean ± standard deviation). Average HR increased from resting baseline during all trials, decreased during the second trial, and increased in the final trial that included audio feedback (p = 0.02). The least-experienced participants reported the greatest change in confidence (novice: +175%, low: +165%, intermediate: +73%, experienced: +13%). All trainees felt auditory feedback added value and improved fidelity.
conclusionHeart rate increased from baseline during simulated FNL on a novel 3D-printed model, implying sympathetic activation and increased stress. HR decreased with repetition, implying improved comfort, but increased with simulated auditory patient responses, suggesting that patient feedback can increase trainee attentiveness. Future studies may analyze the widespread implementation of this model for multi-disciplinary learners. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.
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.