The Journal of laryngology and otology · 2020
Investigating the learning curve in endoscopic compared to microscopic myringotomy and ventilation tube insertion.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Denton O, Daglish A, Smallman L, Fishpool S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Rate of learning is often cited as a deterrent in the use of endoscopic ear surgery. This study investigated the learning curves of novice surgeons performing simulated ear surgery using either an endoscope or a microscope.
METHODS: A prospective multi-site clinical research study was conducted. Seventy-two medical students were randomly allocated to the endoscope or microscope group, and performed 10 myringotomy and ventilation tube insertions. Trial times were used to produce learning curves. From these, slope (learning rate) and asymptote (optimal proficiency) were ascertained.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the learning curves (p = 0.41). The learning rate value was 68.62 for the microscope group and 78.71 for the endoscope group. The optimal proficiency (seconds) was 32.83 for the microscope group and 27.87 for the endoscope group.
CONCLUSION: The absence of a significant difference shows that the learning rates of each technique are statistically indistinguishable. This suggests that surgeons are not justified when citing 'steep learning curve' in arguments against the use of endoscopes in middle-ear surgery.
METHODS: A prospective multi-site clinical research study was conducted. Seventy-two medical students were randomly allocated to the endoscope or microscope group, and performed 10 myringotomy and ventilation tube insertions. Trial times were used to produce learning curves. From these, slope (learning rate) and asymptote (optimal proficiency) were ascertained.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the learning curves (p = 0.41). The learning rate value was 68.62 for the microscope group and 78.71 for the endoscope group. The optimal proficiency (seconds) was 32.83 for the microscope group and 27.87 for the endoscope group.
CONCLUSION: The absence of a significant difference shows that the learning rates of each technique are statistically indistinguishable. This suggests that surgeons are not justified when citing 'steep learning curve' in arguments against the use of endoscopes in middle-ear surgery.