4.5 Article

Does box model training improve surgical dexterity and economy of movement during virtual reality laparoscopy? A randomised trial

Journal

ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA
Volume 87, Issue 1, Pages 99-103

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS
DOI: 10.1080/00016340701789929

Keywords

box model trainer; laparoscopy; virtual reality; skills training

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. Laparoscopic box model trainers have been used in training curricula for a long time, however data on their impact on skills acquisition is still limited. Our aim was to validate a low cost box model trainer as a tool for the training of skills relevant to laparoscopic surgery. Design. Randomised, controlled trial (Canadian Task Force Classification I). Setting. University Hospital. Measurements and main results. Sixteen gynaecologic residents with limited laparoscopic experience were randomised to a group that received a structured box model training curriculum, and a control group. Performance before and after the training was assessed in a virtual reality laparoscopic trainer (LapSim(R)) and was based on objective parameters, registered by the computer system (time, error, and economy of motion scores). Group A showed significantly greater improvement in all performance parameters compared with the control group: economy of movement (p = 0.001), time (p = 0.001) and tissue damage (p = 0.036), confirming the positive impact of box-trainer curriculum on laparoscopic skills acquisition. Conclusions. Structured laparoscopic skill training on a low cost box model trainer improves performance as assessed using the VR system. Trainees who used the box model trainer showed significant improvement compared to the control group. Box model trainers are valid tools for laparoscopic skills training and should be implemented in the comprehensive training curricula in gynaecology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available