Cargando…
The impact of surgical simulation on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
The use of simulation in surgical training is ever growing. Evidence suggests such training may have beneficial clinically relevant effects. The objective of this research is to investigate the effects of surgical simulation training on clinically relevant patient outcomes by evaluating randomized c...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8035110/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32399730 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10143-020-01314-2 |
_version_ | 1783676660186349568 |
---|---|
author | Meling, Trym R. Meling, Torstein R. |
author_facet | Meling, Trym R. Meling, Torstein R. |
author_sort | Meling, Trym R. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The use of simulation in surgical training is ever growing. Evidence suggests such training may have beneficial clinically relevant effects. The objective of this research is to investigate the effects of surgical simulation training on clinically relevant patient outcomes by evaluating randomized controlled trials (RCT). PubMed was searched using PRISMA guidelines: “surgery” [All Fields] AND “simulation” [All Fields] AND “patient outcome” [All Fields]. Of 119 papers identified, 100 were excluded for various reasons. Meta-analyses were conducted using the inverse-variance random-effects method. Nineteen papers were reviewed using the CASP RCT Checklist. Sixteen studies looked at surgical training, two studies assessed patient-specific simulator practice, and one paper focused on warming-up on a simulator before performing surgery. Median study population size was 22 (range 3–73). Most articles reported outcome measures such as post-intervention Global Rating Scale (GRS) score and/or operative time. On average, the intervention group scored 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.12 to 0.71, P = 0.005) points higher on a standardized GRS scale of 1–10. On average, the intervention group was 44% (1% to 87%, P = 0.04) faster than the control group. Four papers assessed the impact of simulation training on patient outcomes, with only one finding a significant effect. We found a significant effect of simulation training on operative performance as assessed by GRS, albeit a small one, as well as a significant reduction to operative time. However, there is to date scant evidence from RCTs to suggest a significant effect of surgical simulation training on patient outcomes. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10143-020-01314-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8035110 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80351102021-04-27 The impact of surgical simulation on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis Meling, Trym R. Meling, Torstein R. Neurosurg Rev Review The use of simulation in surgical training is ever growing. Evidence suggests such training may have beneficial clinically relevant effects. The objective of this research is to investigate the effects of surgical simulation training on clinically relevant patient outcomes by evaluating randomized controlled trials (RCT). PubMed was searched using PRISMA guidelines: “surgery” [All Fields] AND “simulation” [All Fields] AND “patient outcome” [All Fields]. Of 119 papers identified, 100 were excluded for various reasons. Meta-analyses were conducted using the inverse-variance random-effects method. Nineteen papers were reviewed using the CASP RCT Checklist. Sixteen studies looked at surgical training, two studies assessed patient-specific simulator practice, and one paper focused on warming-up on a simulator before performing surgery. Median study population size was 22 (range 3–73). Most articles reported outcome measures such as post-intervention Global Rating Scale (GRS) score and/or operative time. On average, the intervention group scored 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.12 to 0.71, P = 0.005) points higher on a standardized GRS scale of 1–10. On average, the intervention group was 44% (1% to 87%, P = 0.04) faster than the control group. Four papers assessed the impact of simulation training on patient outcomes, with only one finding a significant effect. We found a significant effect of simulation training on operative performance as assessed by GRS, albeit a small one, as well as a significant reduction to operative time. However, there is to date scant evidence from RCTs to suggest a significant effect of surgical simulation training on patient outcomes. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10143-020-01314-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-05-13 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8035110/ /pubmed/32399730 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10143-020-01314-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Meling, Trym R. Meling, Torstein R. The impact of surgical simulation on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | The impact of surgical simulation on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | The impact of surgical simulation on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | The impact of surgical simulation on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | The impact of surgical simulation on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | The impact of surgical simulation on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | impact of surgical simulation on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8035110/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32399730 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10143-020-01314-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT melingtrymr theimpactofsurgicalsimulationonpatientoutcomesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT melingtorsteinr theimpactofsurgicalsimulationonpatientoutcomesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT melingtrymr impactofsurgicalsimulationonpatientoutcomesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT melingtorsteinr impactofsurgicalsimulationonpatientoutcomesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |