The Journal of laryngology and otology · 2024
An update on simulation training in rhinology: a systematic review of evidence.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Brennan Laura J, Balakumar Ramkishan, Waite Seren, Bennett Warren O
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Rhinological procedures demand a high degree of technical expertise and anatomical knowledge. Because of limited surgical opportunities, ethical considerations and the complexity of these procedures, simulation-based training has become increasingly important. This review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of simulation models used in rhinology training.
METHODS: Searches were conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Google Scholar for studies conducted between July 2012 and July 2022. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis ('PRISMA') protocol defined a final list of articles. Each validated study was assigned a level of evidence and a level of recommendation based on the Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine classification.
RESULTS: Following exclusions, 42 articles were identified which encompassed six types of simulation models and 26 studies evaluated validity. The rhinological skills assessed included endoscopic sinus surgery (n = 28), skull base/cerebrospinal fluid leak repair (n = 14), management of epistaxis and/or sphenopalatine artery ligation (n = 8), and septoplasty and septorhinoplasty (n = 6). All studies reported the beneficial impact of their simulation models on trainee development.
CONCLUSION: Simulation training in rhinology is a valuable adjunct to traditional surgical education. Although evidence is of moderate quality, the findings highlight the importance of simulation-based training in rhinology training.
METHODS: Searches were conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Google Scholar for studies conducted between July 2012 and July 2022. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis ('PRISMA') protocol defined a final list of articles. Each validated study was assigned a level of evidence and a level of recommendation based on the Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine classification.
RESULTS: Following exclusions, 42 articles were identified which encompassed six types of simulation models and 26 studies evaluated validity. The rhinological skills assessed included endoscopic sinus surgery (n = 28), skull base/cerebrospinal fluid leak repair (n = 14), management of epistaxis and/or sphenopalatine artery ligation (n = 8), and septoplasty and septorhinoplasty (n = 6). All studies reported the beneficial impact of their simulation models on trainee development.
CONCLUSION: Simulation training in rhinology is a valuable adjunct to traditional surgical education. Although evidence is of moderate quality, the findings highlight the importance of simulation-based training in rhinology training.