Herder Penelope Anne P, Lu Michelle M, LaPorta Anthony J, Ross David W, Calvano Christopher J, Enzenauer Robert W
Rocky Vista University College of Osteopathic Medicine, 8401 S. Chambers Rd, Parker, CO.
San Antonio Military Medical Center, 3551 Roger Brooke Dr, Fort Sam Houston, TX.
Mil Med. 2019 Mar 1;184(Suppl 1):342-346. doi: 10.1093/milmed/usy389.
Military personnel are at greater risks of head and facial traumas and permanent blindness from orbital compartment syndrome in modern warfare. Rapid treatment must be implemented with a low-risk surgical remedy: lateral canthotomy and cantholysis (LCC). Traditional training of LCC is primarily performed using an animal tissue trainer (ATT); however, limitations to these types of trainers exist. Therefore, our research objectives were focused on highlighting the effectiveness, benefits, and vision-saving potential of learning LCC on a synthetic trainer.
Participants included 22 second-year medical students and 6 healthcare professionals. A pre-quiz assessed baseline knowledge. Next, an experienced ophthalmologist provided an overview and instruction. Subjects were randomized to either the synthetic trainer or the ATT and then switched to the other model for comparison. After performing LCC procedures on both models, a post-quiz and survey were administered.
Participants found the synthetic trainer easier to use than the ATT model (p < 0.01). There was no statistically significant preference (p = 0.23), or preference of practical eye anatomy (p = 0.26) between the trainers. Post-quiz results demonstrated an overall improvement from pre-quiz scores for participants (p < 0.001).
The synthetic trainer is comparable to the traditional swine model for training LCC procedures, and should be considered as a future training platform.
在现代战争中,军事人员面临头部和面部创伤以及因眼眶间隔综合征导致永久性失明的风险更高。必须采用低风险的手术治疗方法迅速进行治疗:外眦切开术和眦松解术(LCC)。LCC的传统培训主要使用动物组织训练器(ATT)进行;然而,这类训练器存在局限性。因此,我们的研究目标集中在突出在合成训练器上学习LCC的有效性、益处和挽救视力的潜力。
参与者包括22名医学二年级学生和6名医疗保健专业人员。进行一次预测试以评估基线知识。接下来,一位经验丰富的眼科医生进行概述和指导。受试者被随机分配到合成训练器组或ATT组,然后再切换到另一种模型进行比较。在两种模型上都进行LCC手术后,进行一次后测试和调查。
参与者发现合成训练器比ATT模型更易于使用(p < 0.01)。两种训练器之间在统计学上没有显著的偏好差异(p = 0.23),也没有在实际眼部解剖结构方面的偏好差异(p = 0.26)。后测试结果表明,参与者的分数总体上比预测试分数有所提高(p < 0.001)。
合成训练器在训练LCC手术方面与传统猪模型相当,应被视为未来的训练平台。