Ninos Oussi1, Lars Enochsson2, Lars Henningsohn3, Markus Castegren4, Evangelos Georgiou5, Ann Kjellin6. 1. Division of Surgery, CLINTEC, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Centre for Clinical Research Sörmland, Uppsala University, Eskilstuna, Sweden; Center for Advanced Medical Simulation and Training, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: ninos.oussi@ki.se. 2. Center for Advanced Medical Simulation and Training, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; Division of Surgery, Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. 3. Center for Advanced Medical Simulation and Training, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; Division of Urology, CLINTEC, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Division of Surgery, CLINTEC, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care (PMI), Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden. 5. Medical Physics Laboratory and Simulation Center, Medical School, University of Athens, Athens, Greece. 6. Division of Surgery, CLINTEC, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Center for Advanced Medical Simulation and Training, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Training using laparoscopic high-fidelity simulators (LHFSs) to proficiency levels improves laparoscopic cholecystectomy skills. However, high-cost simulators and their limited availability could negatively impact residents' laparoscopic training opportunities. We aimed to assess whether motivation and surgical skill performance differ after basic skills training (BST) using a low-cost (Blackbox) versus LHFS (LapMentor) among medical students. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Sixty-three medical students from Karolinska Institutet volunteered, completing written informed consent, questionnaire regarding expectations of the simulation training, and a visuospatial ability test. They were randomized into two groups that received BST using Blackbox (n = 32) or LapMentor (n = 31). However, seven students absence resulted in 56 participants, followed by another 9 dropouts. Subsequently, after training, 47 students took up three consecutive tests using theminimally invasive surgical trainer-virtual reality (MIST-VR) simulator, finalizing a questionnaire. RESULTS: More Blackbox group participants completed all MIST-VR tests (29/31 versus 18/25). Students anticipated mastering LapMentor would be more difficult than Blackbox (P = 0.04). In those completing the simulation training, a trend toward an increase was noted in how well participants in the Blackbox group liked the simulator training (P = 0.07). Subgroup analysis of motivation and difficulty in liking the training regardless of simulator was found only in women (Blackbox [P = 0.02]; LapMentor [P = 0.06]). In the Blackbox group, the perceived difficulty of training, facilitation, and liking the Blackbox training (significant only in women) were significantly correlated with the students' performance in the MIST-simulator. No such correlations were found in the LapMentor group. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate an important role for low-tech/low-cost Blackbox laparoscopic BST of students in an otherwise high-tech surrounding. Furthermore, experience of Blackbox BST procedures correlate with students' performance in the MIST-VR simulator, with some gender-specific differences.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Training using laparoscopic high-fidelity simulators (LHFSs) to proficiency levels improves laparoscopic cholecystectomy skills. However, high-cost simulators and their limited availability could negatively impact residents' laparoscopic training opportunities. We aimed to assess whether motivation and surgical skill performance differ after basic skills training (BST) using a low-cost (Blackbox) versus LHFS (LapMentor) among medical students. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-three medical students from Karolinska Institutet volunteered, completing written informed consent, questionnaire regarding expectations of the simulation training, and a visuospatial ability test. They were randomized into two groups that received BST using Blackbox (n = 32) or LapMentor (n = 31). However, seven students absence resulted in 56 participants, followed by another 9 dropouts. Subsequently, after training, 47 students took up three consecutive tests using the minimally invasive surgical trainer-virtual reality (MIST-VR) simulator, finalizing a questionnaire. RESULTS: More Blackbox group participants completed all MIST-VR tests (29/31 versus 18/25). Students anticipated mastering LapMentor would be more difficult than Blackbox (P = 0.04). In those completing the simulation training, a trend toward an increase was noted in how well participants in the Blackbox group liked the simulator training (P = 0.07). Subgroup analysis of motivation and difficulty in liking the training regardless of simulator was found only in women (Blackbox [P = 0.02]; LapMentor [P = 0.06]). In the Blackbox group, the perceived difficulty of training, facilitation, and liking the Blackbox training (significant only in women) were significantly correlated with the students' performance in the MIST-simulator. No such correlations were found in the LapMentor group. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate an important role for low-tech/low-cost Blackbox laparoscopic BST of students in an otherwise high-tech surrounding. Furthermore, experience of Blackbox BST procedures correlate with students' performance in the MIST-VR simulator, with some gender-specific differences.