Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Although surgical simulators are a necessary tool for technical skills training, they are often expensive to purchase and maintain, with limited global accessibility. In our study, we aimed to develop a laparoscopic surgical simulator that is affordable, compact, and whose design and modules can be shared between institutions.
Methods: We designed and manufactured a 3-dimensional-printed laparoscopic simulator kit. We trained 12 medical students and 2 residents in Task 1 of the FLS exam. Each participant was initially evaluated for their baseline score and completion time using a conventional laparoscopic simulator and equipment, then trained using our 3-dimensional-printed simulator. Post-training, a final assessment was conducted on the conventional simulator.
Results: The total material cost for producing the 3-dimensional-printed laparoscopic training kit amounted to 20.91 USD with an average of 33.6 minutes for setup, 58 hours for printing, 52.2 minutes for postprocessing and 83.4 minutes for assembly. No participants achieved proficiency in Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery Task 1. From baseline, the mean time to complete the task decreased from 319.57 (standard deviation, 93.95) seconds to 259.64 (standard deviation, 64.51) seconds (P < .001). Usability (mean, 0.71; standard deviation, 0.73) and realism (mean, 0.71; standard deviation, 0.61) were rated positively, but 78.6% of participants found the simulator inferior to conventional simulators. 85.7% of participants expressed a high likelihood of reusing the 3-dimensional-printed simulator.
Conclusions: Our simulator offers an economical, customizable but lower quality alternative to conventional laparoscopic simulators, thereby functioning as a potential training option to institutes and individuals lacking access to conventional laparoscopic simulators.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2025.109624 | DOI Listing |