ArticleFrontiers in surgery2025
Preparing surgeons for the modern operating theatre: insights from a national survey on technology use and readiness.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Rapid advances in surgical technology require formal training in the use of devices and equipment, yet curricula rarely address technology, equipment, and consumables (TEC) proficiency in a systematic way. This study evaluated current TEC training practices, perceived needs, and barriers among consultant-level surgical educators in Ireland and used these findings to develop a national TEC Toolkit framework rooted in contemporary educational theory. Method: A national cross-specialty survey was distributed to consultant surgical educators, gathering quantitative ratings and qualitative insights regarding TEC education, barriers to readiness, and preferred educational strategies. The twenty-item survey was mapped to Kern's curriculum development framework and constructivist principles. Responses were analysed descriptively and thematically, and Kruskal-Wallis tests compared ratings across three specialty groupings. Results: Thirty-three of 39 educators responded (85%). Fifty-six percent reported having witnessed patient safety risks or workflow issues due to trainee unfamiliarity with TEC. A strong majority (over 90%) endorsed simulation-based training, hands-on workshops, and competency assessment as essential components of TEC education. Barriers included limited protected time, inconsistent access to TEC, and lack of curricular integration. Qualitative themes highlighted the need for practical skills development, multidisciplinary simulation, digital resources, and ongoing programme refinement. These priorities informed the proposed TEC Toolkit, which integrates simulation, multimedia modules, and structured assessment. Conclusion: Surgical educators across Ireland overwhelmingly support structured, simulation-driven TEC training as an essential element of modern surgical safety. The proposed TEC Toolkit model offers a practical, evidence-based blueprint to improve TEC literacy and patient safety. Implementing and evaluating this toolkit will help to address current gaps and prepare trainees for the complexities of today's technology-rich operating theatres.
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.