A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Basic laparoscopic surgical training: examination of a low-cost alternative. | LitMetric

Objective: "Dry lab" facilities are integral to laparoscopy training, but access is often limited due to the high costs of video-laparoscopy equipment. We assessed the effectiveness of a cheap and simple training model compared to conventional video-laparoscopy for basic training using a randomised, blinded study.

Methods: Thirty-six third-year medical students without previous surgical skills were randomised into two groups: group A students were taught basic laparoscopy skills using a conventional video-laparoscopy pelvic trainer and group B students were taught similar techniques using a cardboard box with a cut-out top to allow light and visualisation. Participants in group B had one eye obscured to reduce their stereoscopic vision. After eight sessions of training amounting to 24h, the two groups were assessed by a blinded adjudicator on set tasks using both the video-laparoscopy pelvic trainer and the cardboard box. Accuracy, timing and depth perception were assessed and the results compared.

Results: There was no significant difference in performance scores or times between the two groups in any of the parameters when tested on the cardboard box. However, when assessed on the video trainer, the cardboard box-trained group had significantly faster times with equivalent scores in the majority of tasks.

Conclusion: For basic laparoscopic training the cardboard box, costing nothing, is a simple and effective alternative, which can be used in conjunction with sophisticated video-laparoscopy equipment costing thousands of dollars.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.05.052DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cardboard box
16
basic laparoscopic
8
video-laparoscopy equipment
8
conventional video-laparoscopy
8
group students
8
students taught
8
video-laparoscopy pelvic
8
pelvic trainer
8
trainer cardboard
8
training
6

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!