Abstract

BackgroundMinimal invasive surgery (MIS) is increasingly used for the correction of congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) and esophageal atresia (EA). It is important to master these complex procedures, preferably preclinically, to avoid complications. The aim of this study was to validate recently developed models to train these MIS procedures preclinically. MethodsTwo low cost, reproducible models (one for CDH and one for EA) were validated during several pediatric surgical conferences and training sessions (January 2017–December 2018), used in either the LaparoscopyBoxx or EoSim simulator. Participants used one or both models and completed a questionnaire regarding their opinion on realism (face validity) and didactic value (content validity), rated on a five-point-Likert scale. ResultsOf all 60 participants enrolled, 44 evaluated the EA model. All items were evaluated as significantly better than neutral, with means ranging from 3.7 to 4.1 (p < 0.001). The CDH model was evaluated by 48 participants. All items scored significantly better than neutral (means 3.5–3.9, p < 0.001), with exception of the haptics of the simulated diaphragm (mean 3.3, p = 0.054). Both models were considered a potent training tool (means 3.9). ConclusionThese readily available and low budget models are considered a valid and potent training tool by both experts and target group participants. Type of studyProspective study. Level of evidenceLevel II.

Highlights

  • Minimal invasive surgery (MIS) is increasingly used for the correction of congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) and esophageal atresia (EA)

  • The experienced group consisted of seventeen pediatric surgeons and one pediatric urologist

  • The EA model was evaluated by 44 participants, whereas the CDH model was evaluated by 48 participants

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Minimal invasive surgery (MIS) is increasingly used for the correction of congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) and esophageal atresia (EA). The aim of this study was to validate recently developed models to train these MIS procedures preclinically. All items were evaluated as significantly better than neutral, with means ranging from 3.7 to 4.1 (p b 0.001). All items scored significantly better than neutral (means 3.5–3.9, p b 0.001), with exception of the haptics of the simulated diaphragm (mean 3.3, p = 0.054). Both models were considered a potent training tool (means 3.9). Conclusion: These readily available and low budget models are considered a valid and potent training tool by both experts and target group participants.

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call