Mary K Daly1, Efren Gonzalez, Donna Siracuse-Lee, Paul A Legutko. 1. From the Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System (Daly, Gonzalez, Siracuse-Lee) and the Departments of Ophthalmology, Boston University School of Medicine (Daly, Siracuse-Lee) and Harvard Medical School (Daly, Gonzalez), Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Electronic address: mary.daly2@va.gov.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the operating room performance of ophthalmology residents trained by traditional wet-lab versus surgical simulation on the continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (CCC) portion of cataract surgery. SETTING:Academic tertiary referral center. DESIGN: Prospective randomized study. METHODS:Residents who chose to participate and provided informed consent were randomized to preoperative CCC training in the wet lab or on a simulator. Residents completed pre-practice demographic questionnaires including habits of daily living. After completion of their preoperative training (wet lab versus simulator), residents performed their first CCC of the clinical rotation under the direct supervision of an attending physician as part of their standard training at the facility. Residents then completed satisfaction questionnaires regarding their preoperative training. Two attending surgeons reviewed and graded each video of operating room performance. The mean score between the 2 attending physicians was used as the individual performance score for each of the 12 performance criteria. The overall score was calculated as the sum of these 12 individual performance scores (standardized). RESULTS:Ten residents trained in the wet lab and 11 on the simulator. There was no significant difference in overall score between the 2 groups (P=.608). There was no significant difference in any individual score except time (wet-lab group faster than simulator group) (P=.038). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative simulator training prepared residents for the operating room as effectively as the wet lab. The time to pass the simulator curriculum was predictive of the time and overall performance in the operating room. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned. Published by Elsevier Inc.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the operating room performance of ophthalmology residents trained by traditional wet-lab versus surgical simulation on the continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (CCC) portion of cataract surgery. SETTING: Academic tertiary referral center. DESIGN: Prospective randomized study. METHODS: Residents who chose to participate and provided informed consent were randomized to preoperative CCC training in the wet lab or on a simulator. Residents completed pre-practice demographic questionnaires including habits of daily living. After completion of their preoperative training (wet lab versus simulator), residents performed their first CCC of the clinical rotation under the direct supervision of an attending physician as part of their standard training at the facility. Residents then completed satisfaction questionnaires regarding their preoperative training. Two attending surgeons reviewed and graded each video of operating room performance. The mean score between the 2 attending physicians was used as the individual performance score for each of the 12 performance criteria. The overall score was calculated as the sum of these 12 individual performance scores (standardized). RESULTS: Ten residents trained in the wet lab and 11 on the simulator. There was no significant difference in overall score between the 2 groups (P=.608). There was no significant difference in any individual score except time (wet-lab group faster than simulator group) (P=.038). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative simulator training prepared residents for the operating room as effectively as the wet lab. The time to pass the simulator curriculum was predictive of the time and overall performance in the operating room. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Daniel Shu Wei Ting; Shaun Sebastian Khung Peng Sim; Christine Wen Leng Yau; Mohamad Rosman; Ai Tee Aw; Ian Yew San Yeo Journal: Int J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-06-18 Impact factor: 1.779
Authors: Eileen L Mayro; Laura T Pizzi; Lisa A Hark; Ann P Murchison; Douglas Wisner; Anish Koka; Benjamin E Leiby; Nooreen Dabbish; Adedoyin Okulate; Alexa Dessy; Caitlin Green; Robert Bailey Journal: Am Health Drug Benefits Date: 2018-12
Authors: Shameema Sikder; Jia Luo; P Pat Banerjee; Cristian Luciano; Patrick Kania; Jonathan C Song; Eman S Kahtani; Deepak P Edward; Abdul-Elah Al Towerki Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2015-01-20