ArticleBMC medical education2025
The Australia New Zealand Microsurgical Skills Course - are we providing a high quality educational programme?
Article in BMC medical education, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe three-day Australia New Zealand Microsurgical Skills Course (ANZMSC) is the first ophthalmic microsurgical skills course in the Southern Hemisphere that has been made mandatory by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists (RANZCO) for first year ophthalmology trainees. This study aimed to evaluate the educational value of the course and its cost-effectiveness.
methodsData was collected from the University of Sydney Student Evaluation Forms filled out by all 227 students of the twelve microsurgical skills courses since its commencement in 2018. Evaluations of different course components were compared with descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney non-parametric testing. Thematic analysis of open-ended questions was done.
resultsMost participants felt the course material was valuable for their learning (64.3% strongly agreed, 30.8% agreed). All learning stations ranked highly amongst participants. The most valuable learning experience was suturing on pig eyes, and the least was suturing on surgical skills boards (p < 0.01). Participants described the course as having great educational value for a relatively low cost. They appreciated practising oculoplastic procedures on cadavers, and spending time with the microscope doing corneal suturing. Suggestions to improve the course included more video demonstrations of procedures and replacing skills boards with pig eyelid or skin.
conclusionsThe microsurgical skills course has been appraised by positive feedback from participants, with few areas of suggested improvement to the learning materials. Future directions include objective validation studies demonstrating the change in accuracy and speed of students' corneal suturing, and rates of complications of phacoemulsification before and after the mandating of this course. This would allow a more comprehensive evaluation of the course including sustained teaching efficacy and cost-analysis.
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.