Virtual reality simulator versus box-trainer to teach minimally invasive procedures: A meta-analysis

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_GUEDES_Virtual_reality_simulator_versus_boxtrainer_to_teach_minimally_2019.PDF (2.15 MB)
Citações na Scopus
41
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2019
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
Autores
FERREIRA, Zemia Maria Camara Costa
LEAO, Layra Ribeiro de Sousa
Citação
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, v.61, p.60-68, 2019
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Background: To evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality simulator (VRS) training compared to box-trainer training (BT) for learning outcomes in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques. Materials and Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed using CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, LILACS. The primary outcomes were time to perform MIS and performance score in MIS. After being selected, the articles were evaluated for methodological quality and risk of bias. The results were evaluated for quality of evidence and meta-analysis was performed. Results: 20 randomized clinical trials were included in the qualitative analysis and 14 were used in the meta-analysis. VRS training was more efficient than BT training (P < 0.00001, 95% CI: 35.08 to -25.01) when evaluating participant time needed to complete the peg task. In descriptive analysis, VRS training was better than BT training in participant performance score to perform MIS. There was no statistical difference in the meta-analysis in the time needed to perform surgery, time to complete basic or advanced tasks and performance score for basic or advanced tasks. Conclusions: VRS training was better than BT training in participant performance scores when performing MIS and in the time needed to complete the basic task of peg transfer. In all other outcomes, regardless of the student's level of experience or type of activity, the two forms of training were equivalent.
Palavras-chave
Simulation training, Laparoscopy, Minimally invasive surgical procedures, Training, Box trainer, Virtual reality
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/30771
Referências
  1. Akdemir A, 2014, INT J GYNECOL OBSTET, V127, P309, DOI 10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.07.015
  2. Borahay MA, 2013, J MINIM INVAS GYN, V20, P871, DOI 10.1016/j.jmig.2013.06.005
  3. Brinkmann C, 2017, J SURG EDUC, V74, P724, DOI 10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.12.009
  4. Debes AJ, 2010, AM J SURG, V199, P840, DOI 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.05.016
  5. Diesen DL, 2011, J SURG EDUC, V68, P282, DOI 10.1016/j.jsurg.2011.02.007
  6. Eversbusch A, 2004, SURG ENDOSC, V18, P1514, DOI 10.1007/s00464-003-9264-9
  7. Gurusamy K., 2014, LAPAROSCOPIC SURG BO, V16
  8. Gurusamy KS, 2009, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD006575.pub2
  9. Guyatt GH, 2008, BMJ BR MED J, V336, P1049
  10. Hamilton EC, 2002, SURG ENDOSC, V16, P406, DOI 10.1007/s00464-001-8149-z
  11. Hassan SO, 2015, J SURG EDUC, V72, P592, DOI 10.1016/j.jsurg.2014.12.008
  12. Hiemstra E, 2011, MINIM INVASIV THER, V20, P179, DOI 10.3109/13645706.2010.532502
  13. Higgins J. P. T., 2011, COCHRANE HDB SYSTEMA
  14. Kanumuri P, 2008, JSLS-J SOC LAPAROEND, V12, P219
  15. Loukas C, 2012, SURG ENDOSC, V26, P2550, DOI 10.1007/s00464-012-2230-7
  16. Madan AK, 2007, SURG ENDOSC, V21, P209, DOI 10.1007/s00464-006-0149-6
  17. Maniar HS, 2005, J SURG RES, V125, P23, DOI 10.1016/j.jss.2004.11.010
  18. Matzke J, 2017, J SURG RES, V211, P191, DOI 10.1016/j.jss.2016.11.054
  19. Moher D, 2009, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V339, DOI [10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.004, 10.1136/bmj.b2535, 10.1002/14651858.CD008242.pub3, 10.1002/14651858.CD008216.pub4, 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006, 10.1136/bmj.c869]
  20. Moorthy K, 2004, SURG ENDOSC, V18, P328, DOI 10.1007/s00464-003-8513-2
  21. Nagendran M, 2013, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, V8
  22. Nickel F, 2015, MEDICINE, V94, DOI 10.1097/MD.0000000000000764
  23. Nousiainen M, 2008, SURGERY, V143, P539, DOI 10.1016/j.surg.2007.10.022
  24. Orlando MS, 2017, SURG ENDOSC, V31, P3306, DOI 10.1007/s00464-016-5363-2
  25. Pearson AM, 2002, SURG ENDOSC, V16, P130, DOI 10.1007/s00464-001-8113-y
  26. Reznick R, 1997, AM J SURG, V173, P226, DOI 10.1016/S0002-9610(97)89597-9
  27. Stefanidis D, 2007, SURG ENDOSC, V21, P1158, DOI 10.1007/s00464-006-9112-9
  28. Tanoue K, 2008, SURG ENDOSC, V22, P985, DOI 10.1007/s00464-007-9554-8
  29. Thomaier L, 2017, SURG ENDOSC, V31, P3279, DOI 10.1007/s00464-016-5359-y
  30. Wilkiemeyer M, 2005, ANN SURG, V241, P879, DOI 10.1097/01.sla.0000164076.82559.72
  31. Yiasemidou M, 2017, J SURG RES, V213, P69, DOI 10.1016/j.jss.2017.02.038
  32. Youngblood PL, 2005, J AM COLL SURGEONS, V200, P546, DOI 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2004.11.011
  33. Zendejas B, 2013, ANN SURG, V257, P586, DOI 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318288c40b

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MCG
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HU
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/26
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/62
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - ODS/04