Microsurgery training-A home do-it-yourself model

Loh, Charles Yuen Yung; Tiong, Vincent Tze Yang; Loh, Alex; Athanassopoulos, Thanassi

doi:10.1002/micr.22242

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 3 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, our proposal is less expensive and the price for the kit considers everything you need to perform an anastomosis, including instruments, clamps, and vessels. 30 31 32 33 34 35 Second, our model offers an optical, stereoscopic, binocular magnification, achieving a three-dimensional sensation comparable to the real scenario. We believe that this element is crucial, especially during initial stages of training, and cannot be replaced for digital magnification, besides some studies proposing it.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

MicrosimUC: Validation of a Low-Cost, Portable, Do-It-Yourself Microsurgery Training Kit

Navia

Tejos

Canahuate

et al. 2021

J Reconstr Microsurg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Microsurgery depends largely on simulated training to acquire skills. Courses offered worldwide are usually short and intensive and depend on a physical laboratory. Our objective was to develop and validate a portable, low-cost microsurgery training kit. Methods We modified a miniature microscope. Twenty general surgery residents were selected and divided into two groups: (1) home-based training with the portable microscope (MicrosimUC, n = 10) and (2) the traditional validated microsurgery course at our laboratory (MicroLab, n = 10). Before the intervention, they were assessed making an end-to-end anastomosis in a chicken wing artery. Then, each member of the MicrosimUC group took a portable kit for remote skill training and completed an eight-session curriculum. The laboratory group was trained at the laboratory. After completion of training, they were all reassessed. Pre- and posttraining procedures were recorded and rated by two blind experts using time, basic, and specific scales. Wilcoxon's and Mann–Whitney tests were used to compare scores. The model was tested by experts (n = 10) and a survey was applied to evaluate face and content validity. Results MicrosimUC residents significantly improved their median performance scores after completion of training (p < 0.05), with no significant differences compared with the MicroLab group. The model was rated very useful for acquiring skills with 100% of experts considering it for training. Each kit had a cost of U.S. $92, excluding shipping expenses. Conclusion We developed a low-cost, portable microsurgical training kit and curriculum with significant acquisition of skills in a group of residents, comparable to a formal microsurgery course.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

MicrosimUC: Validation of a Low-Cost, Portable, Do-It-Yourself Microsurgery Training Kit

Navia

Tejos

Canahuate

et al. 2021

J Reconstr Microsurg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7 Loh et al also described a do-it-yourself home microsurgery simulator to combat financial and temporal pressures which may prohibit clinical experience. 9 Although microsurgery simulation cannot replace operative caseload, the literature indicates that it may serve as a valuable compliment to clinical experience.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microsurgery Case Volume During Orthopedic Surgery Residency: A 7-Year Assessment

Hinds

Klifto

Guss

et al. 2016

Hand (New York, N,Y.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The porcine [46] and bovine [85] hearts and the microsurgical simulation model with pulsatile flow system [86] have been devised as alternative methods of education for the trainee microsurgeon. Another example is the home-based microsurgical training model; this modality was shown to be a realistic, cheap, and reproducible tool to help the trainee microsurgeon to maintain already obtained skills [87,88]. Another examples of a simple DIY type of simulator are the plant-based model which uses the halved stem of a chive for microsurgical anastomosis [89], the grapefruit training model for cerebral artery side-to-side microsurgical bypass procedure [90], and other innovations related to neurosurgery [91,92].…”

Section: Advantages Of Virtual Reality and Nonliving Training Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Superiority of living animal models in microsurgical training: beyond technical expertise

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Many studies are investigating the role of living and nonliving models to train microsurgeons. There is controversy around which modalities account for the best microsurgical training. In this study, we aim to provide a systematic literature review of the practical modalities in microsurgery training and compare the living and nonliving models, emphasizing the superiority of the former. We introduce the concept of non-technical skill acquisition in microsurgical training with the use of living laboratory animals in the context of a novel proposed curriculum. Methods A literature search was conducted on PubMed/Medline and Scopus within the past 11 years based on a combination of the following keywords: “microsurgery,” “training,” “skills,” and “models.” The online screening process was performed by two independent reviewers with the Covidence tool. A total of 101 papers was identified as relevant to our study. The protocol was reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Results Living models offer the chance to develop both technical and non-technical competencies (i.e., leadership, situation awareness, decision-making, communication, and teamwork). Prior experience with ex vivo tissues helps residents consolidate basic skills prior to performing more advanced techniques in the living tissues. Trainees reported a higher satisfaction rate with the living models. Conclusions The combination of living and nonliving training microsurgical models leads to superior results; however, the gold standard remains the living model. The validity of the hypothesis that living models enhance non-technical skills remains to be confirmed. Level of evidence: Not ratable.

show abstract

Microsurgery training-A home do-it-yourself model

Cited by 8 publications

References 3 publications

MicrosimUC: Validation of a Low-Cost, Portable, Do-It-Yourself Microsurgery Training Kit

MicrosimUC: Validation of a Low-Cost, Portable, Do-It-Yourself Microsurgery Training Kit

Microsurgery Case Volume During Orthopedic Surgery Residency: A 7-Year Assessment

Superiority of living animal models in microsurgical training: beyond technical expertise

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About