Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS · 2024
Evaluation of a high-fidelity cleft alveolar bone graft simulator.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Podolsky Dale J, Yasabala Branavan, Wong Riff Karen W, Fisher David M
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Cleft alveolar bone graft surgery is technically challenging to perform as well as difficult to learn and teach. A high-fidelity cleft alveolar bone graft simulator was previously developed. However, further evaluation of the simulator is necessary to assess its efficacy.
METHODS: Two cleft simulation workshops were conducted in which participants were led through a simulated cleft alveolar bone graft. The first simulation workshop involved six plastic surgery trainees. The second workshop involved 43 practicing cleft surgeons. The participants were provided with a Likert-type questionnaire assessing the simulators' features, realism, and value as a training tool. The change in self-reported confidence was assessed by providing each participant with a pre- and post-simulation confidence questionnaire.
RESULTS: There was overall agreement in the realism of the simulators' features (average score of 4.67 and 3.80 out of 5 for the trainees and surgeons, respectively). There was overall agreement to strong agreement in the simulators value as a training tool (average score of 5 and 4.43 out of 5 for the trainees and surgeons, respectively). The self-reported confidence increased for all questionnaire items for both the trainees and surgeons. This was significant (p < 0.05) for five out of eight and all questionnaire items for the trainees and surgeons, respectively. The magnitude of the confidence increase was generally greater for less experienced participants.
CONCLUSION: The cleft alveolar bone graft simulator was found to be realistic and valuable as a training platform. Use of the simulator improved self-reported confidence in cleft alveolar bone graft surgery.
METHODS: Two cleft simulation workshops were conducted in which participants were led through a simulated cleft alveolar bone graft. The first simulation workshop involved six plastic surgery trainees. The second workshop involved 43 practicing cleft surgeons. The participants were provided with a Likert-type questionnaire assessing the simulators' features, realism, and value as a training tool. The change in self-reported confidence was assessed by providing each participant with a pre- and post-simulation confidence questionnaire.
RESULTS: There was overall agreement in the realism of the simulators' features (average score of 4.67 and 3.80 out of 5 for the trainees and surgeons, respectively). There was overall agreement to strong agreement in the simulators value as a training tool (average score of 5 and 4.43 out of 5 for the trainees and surgeons, respectively). The self-reported confidence increased for all questionnaire items for both the trainees and surgeons. This was significant (p < 0.05) for five out of eight and all questionnaire items for the trainees and surgeons, respectively. The magnitude of the confidence increase was generally greater for less experienced participants.
CONCLUSION: The cleft alveolar bone graft simulator was found to be realistic and valuable as a training platform. Use of the simulator improved self-reported confidence in cleft alveolar bone graft surgery.