↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Impact of virtual reality simulation on learning barriers of phacoemulsification perceived by residents

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
Impact of virtual reality simulation on learning barriers of phacoemulsification perceived by residents
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, May 2018
DOI 10.2147/opth.s140411
Pubmed ID
Authors

Danny Siu-Chun Ng, Zihan Sun, Alvin Lerrmann Young, Simon Tak-Chuen Ko, Jerry Ka-Hing Lok, Timothy Yuk-Yau Lai, Shameema Sikder, Clement C Tham

Abstract

To identify residents' perceived barriers to learning phacoemulsification surgical procedures and to evaluate whether virtual reality simulation training changed these perceptions. The ophthalmology residents undertook a simulation phacoemulsification course and proficiency assessment on the Eyesi system using the previously validated training modules of intracapsular navigation, anti-tremor, capsulorrhexis, and cracking/chopping. A cross-sectional, multicenter survey on the perceived difficulties in performing phacoemulsification tasks on patients, based on the validated International Council of Ophthalmology's Ophthalmology Surgical Competency Assessment Rubric (ICO-OSCAR), using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = least and 5 = most difficulty), was conducted among residents with or without prior simulation training. Mann-Whitney U tests were carried out to compare the mean scores, and multivariate regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association of lower scores with the following potential predictors: 1) higher level trainee, 2) can complete phacoemulsification most of the time (>90%) without supervisor's intervention, and 3) prior simulation training. The study was conducted in ophthalmology residency training programs in five regional hospitals in Hong Kong. Of the 22 residents, 19 responded (86.3%), of which 13 (68.4%) had completed simulation training. Nucleus cracking/chopping was ranked highest in difficulty by all respondents followed by capsulorrhexis completion and nucleus rotation/manipulation. Respondents with prior simulation training had significantly lower difficulty scores on these three tasks (nucleus cracking/chopping 3.85 vs 4.75, P = 0.03; capsulorrhexis completion 3.31 vs 4.40, P = 0.02; and nucleus rotation/manipulation 3.00 vs 4.75, P = 0.01). In multivariate analyses, simulation training was significantly associated with lower difficulty scores on these three tasks. Residents who had completed Eyesi simulation training had higher confidence in performing the most difficult tasks perceived during phacoemulsification.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Other 5 7%
Other 17 25%
Unknown 21 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 31%
Computer Science 8 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Engineering 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 25 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 13 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,479,843
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,018
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,271
of 339,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#23
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
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 339,234 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.