...
【24h】

Comparison of fresh-frozen cadaver and high-fidelity virtual reality simulator as methods of laparoscopic training.

机译:新鲜冷冻尸体与高保真虚拟现实模拟器作为腹腔镜训练方法的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The aim of this study was to compare fresh-frozen cadavers (FFC) with a high-fidelity virtual reality simulator (VRS) as training tools in minimal access surgery for complex and relatively simple procedures.A prospective comparative face validity study between FFC and VRS (LAP Mentor(?)) was performed. Surgeons were recruited to perform tasks on both FFC and VRS appropriately paired to their experience level. Group A (senior) performed a laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy, Group B (intermediate) performed a laparoscopic incisional hernia repair, and Group C (junior) performed basic laparoscopic tasks (BLT) (camera manipulation, hand-eye coordination, tissue dissection and hand-transferring skills). Each subject completed a 5-point Likert-type questionnaire rating the training modalities in nine domains. Data were analysed using nonparametric tests.Forty-five surgeons were recruited to participate (15 per skill group). Median scores for subjects in Group A were significantly higher for evaluation of FFC in all nine domains compared to VRS (p?
机译:这项研究的目的是比较新鲜冷冻的尸体(FFC)和高保真虚拟现实模拟器(VRS)作为针对复杂和相对简单程序的最小通路手术训练工具.FFC和VRS之间的前瞻性比较面部有效性研究(LAP Mentor(?))被执行。招募了外科医生,以根据他们的经验水平在FFC和VRS上执行任务。 A组(高级)进行了腹腔镜乙状结肠切除术,B组(中级)进行了腹腔镜切口疝修补术,C组(中级)进行了基本的腹腔镜检查任务(BLT)(摄像头操作,手眼协调,组织解剖和手转移技能)。每个受试者完成5点Likert型问卷,对9个领域的培训方式进行评分。使用非参数测试对数据进行分析,招募了45名外科医生参加(每个技能组15名)。与VRS相比,在所有9个域中对FFC进行评估时,A组受试者的中位数得分均显着更高(p <0.01)。 B组在除任务复制外的所有域中的FFC得分均明显更好(p <0.05)(p = 0.06)。 C组在8个域中的FFC得分明显更好(p <0.01),但在性能反馈上却没有(p = 0.09)。与不同小组进行比较时,除团队合作外,大三学生在大多数领域比中高级团队更接受VRS作为训练模型(p?<?0.01)。新鲜冷冻的尸体被认为是整体腹腔镜训练更好的模型。所有培训级别的高保真VRS,无论执行的操作程序的复杂性如何。在BLT中培训初级学员时,VRS仍然有用。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号