The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2022
Teaching Unilateral Cleft lip Repair: Lessons from Simulation-Based Mining of Trainee Strengths and Performance Gaps.
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.
Stanek Krystof, Yao Caroline A, Livingston Katie A, Weinstock Peter H, Rogers-Vizena Carolyn R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To identify specific areas for improvement in cleft lip repair teaching.
DESIGN: Secondary analysis of prospectively-collected, blinded data.
SETTING: Three residency programs rotating at a single academic children's hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: Plastic surgery residents, and craniofacial/pediatric plastic surgery fellows.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean scores for each skill in an 18-item Unilateral Cleft Lip Repair competency assessment tool (UCLR) (1-3 scale for each item) were rank ordered. Correlation between level of training (PGY) and performance on steps of the procedure was examined using Pearson R.
RESULTS: Simulation participants (n = 26) scored highest on skills in the "Marking" subscale (2.38-2.63 mean score). Procedural steps that scored lowest were: closing the nasal floor (2.00), repairing oral mucosa (2.15) and avoiding over/under-dissection (2.19). Interestingly, none of these skills correlated with PGY, suggesting they do not improve with training.
CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that marking cleft lip repair is taught well in our current teaching environment, while steps like closing the nasal floor and repairing the oral mucosa are taught less well. Improved teaching of these steps could be achieved with deliberate instruction, video, digital simulation, and high fidelity simulation.
DESIGN: Secondary analysis of prospectively-collected, blinded data.
SETTING: Three residency programs rotating at a single academic children's hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: Plastic surgery residents, and craniofacial/pediatric plastic surgery fellows.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean scores for each skill in an 18-item Unilateral Cleft Lip Repair competency assessment tool (UCLR) (1-3 scale for each item) were rank ordered. Correlation between level of training (PGY) and performance on steps of the procedure was examined using Pearson R.
RESULTS: Simulation participants (n = 26) scored highest on skills in the "Marking" subscale (2.38-2.63 mean score). Procedural steps that scored lowest were: closing the nasal floor (2.00), repairing oral mucosa (2.15) and avoiding over/under-dissection (2.19). Interestingly, none of these skills correlated with PGY, suggesting they do not improve with training.
CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that marking cleft lip repair is taught well in our current teaching environment, while steps like closing the nasal floor and repairing the oral mucosa are taught less well. Improved teaching of these steps could be achieved with deliberate instruction, video, digital simulation, and high fidelity simulation.