Effectiveness of endoscopic surgery training for medical students using a virtual reality simulator versus a box trainer: A randomized controlled trial

K. Tanoue, S. Ieiri, K. Konishi, T. Yasunaga, Ken Okazaki, S. Yamaguchi, D. Yoshida, Y. Kakeji, Makoto Hashizume

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

43 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The first step toward increasing the level of patient safety in endoscopic surgery is for all endoscopic surgeons to acquire fundamental skills, including psychomotor skills, in the preoperation stage of training. The current study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) simulator training and box training for training the fundamental skills of endoscopic surgery. Methods: For this study, 35 medical students at Kyushu University were divided into three groups: simulator (SIM) group (n = 20), box trainer (BOX) group (n = 20), and control group (n = 15). None of the students had any experience assisting with endoscopic surgery or any previous training for endoscopic surgery. The students in the SIM group underwent training using a VR simulator, the Procedicus MIST, 2 h per day for 2 days. The students in the BOX group underwent training using a box trainer 2 h per day for 2 days. The students in the control group watched an educational video for 30 min. The endoscopic surgical skills of all the students were evaluated before and after training with a task of suturing and knot tying using a box trainer. Results: Although no significant differences were found between the three groups in the total time taken to complete the evaluation task before training, there were significant improvements in the SIM and BOX groups after training compared with the control group. Box training increased errors during the task, but simulator training did not. Conclusion: The findings showed that box training and VR training have different outcomes. The authors expect that the best curriculum for their training center would involve a combination that uses the merits of both methods.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)985-990
Number of pages6
JournalSurgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
Volume22
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 1 2008

Fingerprint

Medical Students
Randomized Controlled Trials
Students
Control Groups
Patient Safety
Curriculum

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Cite this

Effectiveness of endoscopic surgery training for medical students using a virtual reality simulator versus a box trainer : A randomized controlled trial. / Tanoue, K.; Ieiri, S.; Konishi, K.; Yasunaga, T.; Okazaki, Ken; Yamaguchi, S.; Yoshida, D.; Kakeji, Y.; Hashizume, Makoto.

In: Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, Vol. 22, No. 4, 01.04.2008, p. 985-990.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tanoue, K. ; Ieiri, S. ; Konishi, K. ; Yasunaga, T. ; Okazaki, Ken ; Yamaguchi, S. ; Yoshida, D. ; Kakeji, Y. ; Hashizume, Makoto. / Effectiveness of endoscopic surgery training for medical students using a virtual reality simulator versus a box trainer : A randomized controlled trial. In: Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques. 2008 ; Vol. 22, No. 4. pp. 985-990.
@article{d0696f2681d248bca1c3c37a100b6dd7,
title = "Effectiveness of endoscopic surgery training for medical students using a virtual reality simulator versus a box trainer: A randomized controlled trial",
abstract = "Background: The first step toward increasing the level of patient safety in endoscopic surgery is for all endoscopic surgeons to acquire fundamental skills, including psychomotor skills, in the preoperation stage of training. The current study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) simulator training and box training for training the fundamental skills of endoscopic surgery. Methods: For this study, 35 medical students at Kyushu University were divided into three groups: simulator (SIM) group (n = 20), box trainer (BOX) group (n = 20), and control group (n = 15). None of the students had any experience assisting with endoscopic surgery or any previous training for endoscopic surgery. The students in the SIM group underwent training using a VR simulator, the Procedicus MIST, 2 h per day for 2 days. The students in the BOX group underwent training using a box trainer 2 h per day for 2 days. The students in the control group watched an educational video for 30 min. The endoscopic surgical skills of all the students were evaluated before and after training with a task of suturing and knot tying using a box trainer. Results: Although no significant differences were found between the three groups in the total time taken to complete the evaluation task before training, there were significant improvements in the SIM and BOX groups after training compared with the control group. Box training increased errors during the task, but simulator training did not. Conclusion: The findings showed that box training and VR training have different outcomes. The authors expect that the best curriculum for their training center would involve a combination that uses the merits of both methods.",
author = "K. Tanoue and S. Ieiri and K. Konishi and T. Yasunaga and Ken Okazaki and S. Yamaguchi and D. Yoshida and Y. Kakeji and Makoto Hashizume",
year = "2008",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00464-007-9554-8",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "985--990",
journal = "Surgical Endoscopy",
issn = "0930-2794",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effectiveness of endoscopic surgery training for medical students using a virtual reality simulator versus a box trainer

T2 - A randomized controlled trial

AU - Tanoue, K.

AU - Ieiri, S.

AU - Konishi, K.

AU - Yasunaga, T.

AU - Okazaki, Ken

AU - Yamaguchi, S.

AU - Yoshida, D.

AU - Kakeji, Y.

AU - Hashizume, Makoto

PY - 2008/4/1

Y1 - 2008/4/1

N2 - Background: The first step toward increasing the level of patient safety in endoscopic surgery is for all endoscopic surgeons to acquire fundamental skills, including psychomotor skills, in the preoperation stage of training. The current study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) simulator training and box training for training the fundamental skills of endoscopic surgery. Methods: For this study, 35 medical students at Kyushu University were divided into three groups: simulator (SIM) group (n = 20), box trainer (BOX) group (n = 20), and control group (n = 15). None of the students had any experience assisting with endoscopic surgery or any previous training for endoscopic surgery. The students in the SIM group underwent training using a VR simulator, the Procedicus MIST, 2 h per day for 2 days. The students in the BOX group underwent training using a box trainer 2 h per day for 2 days. The students in the control group watched an educational video for 30 min. The endoscopic surgical skills of all the students were evaluated before and after training with a task of suturing and knot tying using a box trainer. Results: Although no significant differences were found between the three groups in the total time taken to complete the evaluation task before training, there were significant improvements in the SIM and BOX groups after training compared with the control group. Box training increased errors during the task, but simulator training did not. Conclusion: The findings showed that box training and VR training have different outcomes. The authors expect that the best curriculum for their training center would involve a combination that uses the merits of both methods.

AB - Background: The first step toward increasing the level of patient safety in endoscopic surgery is for all endoscopic surgeons to acquire fundamental skills, including psychomotor skills, in the preoperation stage of training. The current study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) simulator training and box training for training the fundamental skills of endoscopic surgery. Methods: For this study, 35 medical students at Kyushu University were divided into three groups: simulator (SIM) group (n = 20), box trainer (BOX) group (n = 20), and control group (n = 15). None of the students had any experience assisting with endoscopic surgery or any previous training for endoscopic surgery. The students in the SIM group underwent training using a VR simulator, the Procedicus MIST, 2 h per day for 2 days. The students in the BOX group underwent training using a box trainer 2 h per day for 2 days. The students in the control group watched an educational video for 30 min. The endoscopic surgical skills of all the students were evaluated before and after training with a task of suturing and knot tying using a box trainer. Results: Although no significant differences were found between the three groups in the total time taken to complete the evaluation task before training, there were significant improvements in the SIM and BOX groups after training compared with the control group. Box training increased errors during the task, but simulator training did not. Conclusion: The findings showed that box training and VR training have different outcomes. The authors expect that the best curriculum for their training center would involve a combination that uses the merits of both methods.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=42149143472&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=42149143472&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00464-007-9554-8

DO - 10.1007/s00464-007-9554-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 17710487

AN - SCOPUS:42149143472

VL - 22

SP - 985

EP - 990

JO - Surgical Endoscopy

JF - Surgical Endoscopy

SN - 0930-2794

IS - 4

ER -