ArticleIrish veterinary journal2025
Early-phase laparoscopic skill acquisition in veterinary students: impact of 2D/3D vision and conventional/articulating instruments.
Article in Irish veterinary journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Physical simulation models for veterinary surgical training: a systematic review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive surgery has been increasingly adopted for its advantages of reduced postoperative pain and faster recovery, underscoring the importance of structured basic skills training. In human medicine, robotic surgery addresses the limitations of conventional laparoscopy, but widespread adoption in veterinary practice is constrained by cost and logistics. The potential for cost-effective alternatives such as three-dimensional (3D) visualization and novel articulating laparoscopic instruments (ALI) is growing, but evidence for their impact on novice training remains limited. This study investigated the influence of visualization systems (two-dimensional (2D) vs. 3D) and instrument types (conventional laparoscopic instruments (CLI) vs. ALI) on early-phase laparoscopic skill acquisition in veterinary students, and to assess feasibility of the performance improvement (Pi) score as an integrated metric.
resultsForty-eight students with no prior laparoscopic experience were randomized into four groups: 2D + CLI, 2D + ALI, 3D + CLI, and 3D + ALI (n = 12 per group). All the participants completed five repetitions of three standardized tasks on a box trainer (peg transfer, pattern cutting, needle guidance). The Pi scores were significantly positively correlated reductions in completion time (ρ = 0.443–0.674, p ≤ 0.002) and errors (ρ = 0.538–0.851, p < 0.001) across tasks. Compared with the ALI group, CLI groups achieved significantly greater performance improvements in peg transfer (F(1,44) = 5.251, p = 0.027; partial η² = 0.107) and needle guidance (F(1,44) = 9.435, p = 0.004; partial η² = 0.177). Although the main effect of vision was not significant, 3D group showed a consistent trend toward higher mean Pi scores than 2D group in all tasks (peg transfer: 1.384 vs. 1.338; pattern cutting: 1.350 vs. 1.311; needle guidance: 1.393 vs. 1.343). No interaction effects were detected. The Simulator Sickness Questionnaire and NASA Task Load Index scores did not differ between the groups.
conclusionsThe Pi score provides a valid, comprehensive index reflecting both time and error in early-phase of laparoscopic training, enabling grade-based feedback. Compared with the ALI, the CLI showed higher short-term performance improvement in peg transfer and needle guidance. 3D vision has the potential to alleviate visuomotor demands without inducing simulator sickness. These findings suggest that laparoscopic training should be adapted to individual performance levels, learning objectives, and equipment-specific demands.
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.