Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Background Laparoscopic appendectomy is a common procedure and introduced early in general surgical training. How internal (i.e. surgeon’s experience) or external (i.e. disease severity) may affect procedure performance is not well-studied. The aim of this study was to evaluate factors that may have an influence on the performance scores for surgical trainees. Methods A prospective, observational cohort study of laparoscopic appendectomies performed by surgical trainees (experience < 4 years) operating under supervision. Trainers evaluated trainees’ overall performance on a 6-point scale for proficiency. Perioperative data were recorded, including appendicitis severity, operating time and the overall difficulty of the procedure as assessed by the trainer. A “Challenging” procedure was defined as a combination of either/or “perforation” and “difficult”. Trainees who had performed > 30 appendectomies were defined as “experienced”. The trainees were asked if they had used simulation or web-based tools the week prior to surgery. Results 142 procedure evaluation forms were included of which 19 (13%) were “perforated”, 14 (10%) “difficult” and 24 (17%) “Challenging”. Perforated appendicitis was strongly associated with procedure difficulty (OR 21.2, 95% CI 6.0–75.6). Experienced trainees performed “proficient” more often than non-experienced (OR 34.5, 95% CI 6.8–176.5). “Difficult” procedures were inversely associated with proficiency (OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.0–0.9). In “Challenging” procedures, identifying the appendix had lowest proficiency (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.1–0.9). The procedures assessed as “difficult” had significantly longer operating time with a median (IQR) of 90 (75–100) min compared to 59 (25–120) min for the non-difficult (p < 0.001). Conclusion Both internal and external factors contribute to the performance score. Perforated appendicitis, technical difficult procedures and trainee experience all play a role, but a “difficult” procedure had most overall impact on proficiency evaluation. Graphical Abstract
Background Laparoscopic appendectomy is a common procedure and introduced early in general surgical training. How internal (i.e. surgeon’s experience) or external (i.e. disease severity) may affect procedure performance is not well-studied. The aim of this study was to evaluate factors that may have an influence on the performance scores for surgical trainees. Methods A prospective, observational cohort study of laparoscopic appendectomies performed by surgical trainees (experience < 4 years) operating under supervision. Trainers evaluated trainees’ overall performance on a 6-point scale for proficiency. Perioperative data were recorded, including appendicitis severity, operating time and the overall difficulty of the procedure as assessed by the trainer. A “Challenging” procedure was defined as a combination of either/or “perforation” and “difficult”. Trainees who had performed > 30 appendectomies were defined as “experienced”. The trainees were asked if they had used simulation or web-based tools the week prior to surgery. Results 142 procedure evaluation forms were included of which 19 (13%) were “perforated”, 14 (10%) “difficult” and 24 (17%) “Challenging”. Perforated appendicitis was strongly associated with procedure difficulty (OR 21.2, 95% CI 6.0–75.6). Experienced trainees performed “proficient” more often than non-experienced (OR 34.5, 95% CI 6.8–176.5). “Difficult” procedures were inversely associated with proficiency (OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.0–0.9). In “Challenging” procedures, identifying the appendix had lowest proficiency (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.1–0.9). The procedures assessed as “difficult” had significantly longer operating time with a median (IQR) of 90 (75–100) min compared to 59 (25–120) min for the non-difficult (p < 0.001). Conclusion Both internal and external factors contribute to the performance score. Perforated appendicitis, technical difficult procedures and trainee experience all play a role, but a “difficult” procedure had most overall impact on proficiency evaluation. Graphical Abstract
No abstract
BACKGROUND Amidst a growing need for improved surgical training, the conventional "see one, do one, teach one" model falls short, particularly for complex procedures like pedicle screw placement. This study introduces an Immersive Mixed Reality Training Framework (IMR-STF) designed to bridge this gap by integrating advanced mixed reality technologies with traditional surgical training to provide comprehensive, hands-on experience without the logistical constraints and ethical concerns of traditional methods. OBJECTIVE With the increasing constraints in surgical training, this study aimed to propose a novel Immersive Mixed Reality Surgical Training Framework(IMR-STF) to facilitate surgical skill development among medical students and evaluate its efficacy. Under IMR-STF, the authors developed the Immersive Mixed Reality Surgical Self-Training System(IMR-SS) for pedicle screw placement, seeking to overcome the limitations of traditional training by providing an immersive, interactive, and high-fidelity training environment METHODS A conceptual Immersive Mixed Reality Surgical Training Framework (IMR-STF) was proposed, under which a self-training system was prototyped as IMR-SS for pedicle screw placement for validation. The system integrates 3D-printed models, real surgical instruments, and IMR technology to provide an immersive learning experience and high-fidelity haptic feedback. A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 32 undergraduate medical students from two centers. Participants were randomly assigned to either the IMR Group(using IMR-SS) or the Control Group (using a digital textbook). Both groups underwent theoretical and practical training, followed by identical assessments. RESULTS The IMR Group demonstrated significantly higher completion rates (0.99±0.02 vs. 0.87±0.11, p=0.000) and fewer errors(0.06±0.25 vs. 2.13±1.54, p=0.000) compared to the Control Group. Additionally, the IMR Group showed better performance in screw placement angles(13.88°±6.98° vs. 20.89°±11.59°, p=0.049) and more stable performance with smaller variances. No cortical bone breaches were observed in the IMR Group, while the Control Group had breaches in 4 out of 16 cases during the exercise session (p=0.051). The theoretical assessment showed no significant difference between the groups, indicating equivalent baseline knowledge. The IMR Group reported higher satisfaction and confidence in learning outcomes. CONCLUSIONS The IMR-SS is a feasible and effective method for enhancing surgical education for novice medical students, providing superior hands-on training experiences, and improving practical skills. Future research should focus on long-term learning curve validation, skill transferability, and developing curricula for more surgeries for generalizability validation. CLINICALTRIAL This study was deemed exempt by the Peking Union Medical College Hospital(K5533-K24C0630) and The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University(XJTU1AF2024LSYY-097).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.