Literature DB >> 33224797

Evaluating the feasibility of a novel Marking Breast Oncoplastic Surgery Simulator (MBOSS) as a training tool for marking: a randomised trial.

Geok Hoon Lim1,2, Xue Wang3, John C Allen4, Ruey Pyng Ng5, Bien Keem Tan6, Stephen McCulley7, Heow Pueh Lee3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Currently, volunteers and/or anatomical models are used for teaching oncoplastic surgery marking. However, as the breast is an intimate organ, recruiting volunteers is difficult, and the available droopy breast models have limitations. We evaluated the feasibility of a novel Marking Breast Oncoplastic Surgery Simulator (MBOSS) for the teaching of marking.
METHODS: Breast/plastic surgeons/trainees, grouped according to their oncoplastic experience, were randomized to MBOSS or volunteer. All had a pre-test evaluation prior to receiving hands-on training in inverted T mammoplasty marking in their randomized group, followed by an assessment of their marking skills, by an examiner blinded to their group assignment. All participants then underwent post-test and course evaluations, and those who used MBOSS for training, also evaluated MBOSS realism. Learning outcomes between the two groups were compared using the Kirkpatrick educational model.
RESULTS: Forty participants were enrolled. Demographics, baseline oncoplastic experience and pre-test results were comparable between the MBOSS and volunteer groups. For Kirkpatrick level 1 satisfaction outcomes, the two groups did not differ significantly. For level 2 knowledge assessment, MBOSS post-test scores were significantly higher (P=0.0471). For level 3 skill application and level 4 organizational impact evaluated 6 months post course, there were no significant differences between the groups. Although MBOSS may not mimic the breast completely, 95% of MBOSS-trained participants rated MBOSS as a good training tool and 85% would use MBOSS instead of a volunteer.
CONCLUSIONS: MBOSS learning outcomes are comparable to outcomes using volunteers, making MBOSS an alternative for teaching oncoplastic surgery marking. 2020 Gland Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; education; mammoplasty; simulation training; surgery

Year:  2020        PMID: 33224797      PMCID: PMC7667095          DOI: 10.21037/gs-20-476

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gland Surg        ISSN: 2227-684X


  14 in total

Review 1.  Program evaluation models and related theories: AMEE guide no. 67.

Authors:  Ann W Frye; Paul A Hemmer
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.650

Review 2.  Simulation-based surgical education.

Authors:  Evgenios Evgeniou; Peter Loizou
Journal:  ANZ J Surg       Date:  2012-10-22       Impact factor: 1.872

3.  Therapeutic mammaplasty--analysis of 50 consecutive cases.

Authors:  S J McCulley; R D Macmillan
Journal:  Br J Plast Surg       Date:  2005-10

4.  Mastotrainer new version: realistic simulator for training in breast surgery.

Authors:  G Zucca-Matthes; Gail Lebovic; Marcos Lyra
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2016-11-05       Impact factor: 4.380

5.  Virtual breast oncoplastic surgery simulator (VBOSS): A novel training tool in breast surgery.

Authors:  Geok Hoon Lim; Jieying Lee; Ching Chiuan Yen
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-08-13       Impact factor: 4.424

6.  Oncoplastic breast surgery for cancer: analysis of 540 consecutive cases [outcomes article].

Authors:  Alfred D Fitoussi; M G Berry; Fausto Famà; Marie-Christine Falcou; Alain Curnier; Benoit Couturaud; Fabien Reyal; Remy J Salmon
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.730

7.  Improving clinical breast examination training in a medical school: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  C Pilgrim; C Lannon; R P Harris; W Cogburn; S W Fletcher
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  A meta-analysis comparing breast conservation therapy alone to the oncoplastic technique.

Authors:  Albert Losken; Claire S Dugal; Toncred M Styblo; Grant W Carlson
Journal:  Ann Plast Surg       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 1.539

9.  An overview of randomization techniques: An unbiased assessment of outcome in clinical research.

Authors:  Kp Suresh
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2011-01

Review 10.  Novel Biomaterials Used in Medical 3D Printing Techniques.

Authors:  Karthik Tappa; Udayabhanu Jammalamadaka
Journal:  J Funct Biomater       Date:  2018-02-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.