ArticleActa neurochirurgica2025
Under forty hours of laboratory training may be sufficient for teaching basic microsurgical skills to novices.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2025. 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.
- Simulation speeds up adaptation to the 3D exoscope: a randomized controlled trial.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Basic microsurgical skills can be taught to novices with video material only - a prospective multicenter laboratory study.Brain & spine · 2026Article
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
backgroundStructured laboratory-based microsurgical training is considered beneficial for junior residents before they begin to work in a neurosurgical operating room. The optimal duration of such training remains unclear. We studied the effect of a 40-h microsurgical laboratory course on the development of basic microsurgical skills among novices.
methodsA total of 27 medical students participated in the study. Seven students (5 men, 2 women) underwent a structured microsurgical laboratory training program over four weeks. 20 students (10 women, 10 men) served as an untrained control group. None of the students had prior experience in microsuturing or working under magnification. The intervention group practiced for two hours per day, five days per week, over a four-week period. Skill development was assessed at baseline, after two weeks, and after four weeks of training with a microsuturing test task, and was monitored continuously throughout the training period with a microscraping test task. Microsurgical performance was compared between the intervention and the control groups using a test task performed under a surgical exoscope after two weeks of training. This task assessed complex depth perception and hand-eye coordination through the precise placement of a microneedle into small, concealed targets.
resultsFor the microsuturing task the median time improved throughout the training (baseline: 44 min (interquartile range IQR = 22), 20 h training: 21 min (IQR = 6), 40 h training: 14 min (IQR = 4)). Similarly, the duration of the scraping task improved (baseline: 40 min (IQR 2), 20 h training: 15 min (IQR = 7), 40 h training: 13 min (IQR = 7)). The quality of work, including scraping accuracy, suture tightness and spacing, remained consistent in both tasks. In the exoscope task, the intervention group outperformed the control group (median task duration 6 min 54 s, IQR = 3 min vs 9 min 24 s, IQR = 6 min; p = 0.04).
conclusionsNovices demonstrated rapid improvement during a 40-h microsurgical laboratory training course. Even less than 40 h of structured practice might be enough for surgical novices, such as neurosurgery residents, to learn the most basic microsurgical skills prior to assisting in the operating room.
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.