Literature DB >> 28407264

Microvascular anastomosis simulation using a chicken thigh model: Interval versus massed training.

Stephen Schoeff1, Brian Hernandez1, Derek J Robinson1, Mark J Jameson1, David C Shonka1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To compare the effectiveness of massed versus interval training when teaching otolaryngology residents microvascular suturing on a validated microsurgical model. STUDY
DESIGN: Otolaryngology residents were placed into interval (n = 7) or massed (n = 7) training groups. The interval group performed three separate 30-minute practice sessions separated by at least 1 week, and the massed group performed a single 90-minute practice session. Both groups viewed a video demonstration and recorded a pretest prior to the first training session. A post-test was administered following the last practice session.
METHODS: At an academic medical center, 14 otolaryngology residents were assigned using stratified randomization to interval or massed training. Blinded evaluators graded performance using a validated microvascular Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill tool. The tool is comprised of two major components: task-specific score (TSS) and global rating scale (GRS). Participants also received pre- and poststudy surveys to compare subjective confidence in multiple aspects of microvascular skill acquisition.
RESULTS: Overall, all residents showed increased TSS and GRS on post- versus pretest. After completion of training, the interval group had a statistically significant increase in both TSS and GRS, whereas the massed group's increase was not significant. Residents in both groups reported significantly increased levels of confidence after completion of the study.
CONCLUSIONS: Self-directed learning using a chicken thigh artery model may benefit microsurgical skills, competence, and confidence for resident surgeons. Interval training results in significant improvement in early development of microvascular anastomosis skills, whereas massed training does not. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA. Laryngoscope, 127:2490-2494, 2017.
© 2017 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Microvascular reconstruction and transplant surgery; head and neck; reconstructive surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28407264     DOI: 10.1002/lary.26586

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Laryngoscope        ISSN: 0023-852X            Impact factor:   3.325


  5 in total

1.  Porcine As a Training Module for Head and Neck Microvascular Reconstruction.

Authors:  Mohammad Ali Alessa; Sang Hyun Kwak; Young Woo Lee; Mi-Lan Kang; Hak-Joon Sung; Soon Hyun Ahn; Eun Chang Choi; Won Shik Kim
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 1.355

Review 2.  Mind the Gap: a Competency-Based Scoping Review of Aesthetic and Reconstructive Reported Simulation Training Models.

Authors:  Rodrigo Tejos; Juan Enrique Berner; Felipe Imigo; Nicolás Besser; Andrea Ramírez; Daniel Moreno; Gonzalo Yañez; Alvaro Cuadra; Susana Searle; Claudio Guerra
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 2.326

3.  Chicken thigh microvascular training model improves resident surgical skills.

Authors:  Francis X Creighton; Allen L Feng; Neerav Goyal; Kevin Emerick; Daniel Deschler
Journal:  Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol       Date:  2017-10-11

4.  Low-cost model using a digital microscope for learning, practicing, and maintaining microvascular surgical skills.

Authors:  A Chai; S Crank; K Mizen; J Philip
Journal:  Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2020-08-20       Impact factor: 1.651

Review 5.  Conceptualising spaced learning in health professions education: A scoping review.

Authors:  Marjolein Versteeg; Renée A Hendriks; Aliki Thomas; Belinda W C Ommering; Paul Steendijk
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2019-12-20       Impact factor: 6.251

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.