↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

An evidence-based laparoscopic simulation curriculum shortens the clinical learning curve and reduces surgical adverse events

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Medical Education and Practice, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
An evidence-based laparoscopic simulation curriculum shortens the clinical learning curve and reduces surgical adverse events
Published in
Advances in Medical Education and Practice, June 2016
DOI 10.2147/amep.s102000
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gunter De Win, Siska Van Bruwaene, Jyotsna Kulkarni, Ben Van Calster, Rajesh Aggarwal, Christopher Allen, Ann Lissens, Dirk De Ridder, Marc Miserez

Abstract

Surgical simulation is becoming increasingly important in surgical education. However, the method of simulation to be incorporated into a surgical curriculum is unclear. We compared the effectiveness of a proficiency-based preclinical simulation training in laparoscopy with conventional surgical training and conventional surgical training interspersed with standard simulation sessions. In this prospective single-blinded trial, 30 final-year medical students were randomized into three groups, which differed in the way they were exposed to laparoscopic simulation training. The control group received only clinical training during residency, whereas the interval group received clinical training in combination with simulation training. The Center for Surgical Technologies Preclinical Training Program (CST PTP) group received a proficiency-based preclinical simulation course during the final year of medical school but was not exposed to any extra simulation training during surgical residency. After 6 months of surgical residency, the influence on the learning curve while performing five consecutive human laparoscopic cholecystectomies was evaluated with motion tracking, time, Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills, and number of adverse events (perforation of gall bladder, bleeding, and damage to liver tissue). The odds of adverse events were 4.5 (95% confidence interval 1.3-15.3) and 3.9 (95% confidence interval 1.5-9.7) times lower for the CST PTP group compared with the control and interval groups. For raw time, corrected time, movements, path length, and Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills, the CST PTP trainees nearly always started at a better level and were never outperformed by the other trainees. Proficiency-based preclinical training has a positive impact on the learning curve of a laparoscopic cholecystectomy and diminishes adverse events.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 16%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Other 7 7%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 23 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Psychology 6 6%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 31 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 May 2021.
All research outputs
#16,991,104
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,832
of 354,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.2. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 354,808 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them