Suppr超能文献

用于腹腔镜胆囊切除术的搏动性器官灌注训练器的表面效度。

Face validity of the pulsatile organ perfusion trainer for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

作者信息

Nickel Felix, Kowalewski Karl-Friedrich, Rehberger Florian, Hendrie Jonathan David, Mayer Benjamin Friedrich Berthold, Kenngott Hannes Götz, Bintintan Vasile, Linke Georg Richard, Fischer Lars, Müller-Stich Beat Peter

机构信息

Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.

Department of Surgery, 1st Surgical Clinic, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2017 Feb;31(2):714-722. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5025-4. Epub 2016 Jun 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The pulsatile organ perfusion (POP) trainer provides training of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with real instruments and cadaveric organs. It provides training of full procedures with simulation of bleeding. Although widely used, the face validity has not yet been evaluated. This study aimed to establish face validity of the POP trainer for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and its usefulness compared with other training modalities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During MIS courses, the participants (n = 52) used the POP trainer to perform LC. Face validity was assessed with questionnaires for realism and usefulness on a five-point Likert scale. Participants were divided into two groups: experts (n = 15) who had performed more than 50 laparoscopic procedures and novices (n = 37) with less than 50 procedures. Secondary aims included the ranking of training modalities, as well as exploration of their specific advantages and disadvantages.

RESULTS

The POP trainer was found to be realistic (3.8 ± 0.9) and useful (4.6 ± 0.9). Differences between experts and novices were only found for "The training modality resembles reality" (3.1 ± 0.8 vs. 3.8 ± 0.7; p = 0.010), "The operation on the POP trainer is realistic" (3.4 ± 1.1 vs. 4.5 ± 0.8; p = 0.003), and "It would be desirable to have a POP trainer at my own hospital" (4.2 ± 1.1 vs. 4.8 ± 0.8; p = 0.040). In the ranking, the animal training (1.1 ± 0.3) placed first, the POP trainer (2.3 ± 0.9) second, and the VR trainer (2.8 ± 0.9) and box trainer (2.8 ± 1.1) third. The realistic simulation of animal training was named as an advantage most often, while the unrealistic simulation of the VR trainer was the most often named disadvantage.

CONCLUSIONS

The POP trainer was rated a highly realistic and useful training modality with face validity for LC. Differences between experts and novices existed concerning realism and desirability. Future studies should evaluate the POP trainer for more advanced surgical procedures. The POP trainer widens the spectrum of modalities for training of MIS in a safe environment outside the operating room.

摘要

背景

搏动性器官灌注(POP)训练器可使用真实器械和尸体器官进行微创手术(MIS)训练。它能在模拟出血的情况下进行完整手术流程的训练。尽管已被广泛使用,但尚未对其表面效度进行评估。本研究旨在确定POP训练器用于腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)的表面效度及其与其他训练方式相比的实用性。

材料与方法

在MIS课程中,参与者(n = 52)使用POP训练器进行LC操作。通过五点李克特量表问卷对表面效度进行评估,内容包括真实感和实用性。参与者分为两组:进行过50例以上腹腔镜手术的专家(n = 15)和手术例数少于50例的新手(n = 37)。次要目标包括对训练方式进行排名,以及探究它们的具体优缺点。

结果

发现POP训练器具有真实感(3.8 ± 0.9)且实用(4.6 ± 0.9)。专家和新手之间的差异仅体现在“训练方式与实际相似”(3.1 ± 0.8对3.8 ± 0.7;p = 0.010)、“在POP训练器上的操作具有真实感”(3.4 ± 1.1对4.5 ± 0.8;p = 0.003)以及“希望自己所在医院拥有一台POP训练器”(4.2 ± 1.1对4.8 ± 0.8;p = 0.040)。在排名中动物训练(1.1 ± 0.3)位居第一,POP训练器(2.3 ± 0.9)排第二,虚拟现实(VR)训练器(2.8 ± 0.9)和箱式训练器(2.8 ± 1.1)并列第三。动物训练的真实模拟被最常提及为优点,而VR训练器的模拟不真实则是最常被提及的缺点。

结论

POP训练器被评为对LC具有高度真实感且实用的训练方式,具有表面效度。专家和新手在真实感和需求方面存在差异。未来研究应评估POP训练器用于更高级手术操作的情况。POP训练器拓宽了在手术室之外的安全环境中进行MIS训练的方式范围。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验