Background: Practice on Virtual Reality simulators (VRS) have been shown to improve surgical performance. However, VRS are expensive and usually housed in surgical skills centres that may be inaccessible at times convenient for surgical trainees to practice. Conversely, box trainers are inexpensive and can be used anywhere at anytime. This study assesses “take-home” Box Trainers (BT) as an alternative to VRS. Methods: After baseline assessments (two simulated laparoscopic cholecystectomies, one on a VRS and one on a BT) 25 surgical trainees were randomised to two groups. Trainees were asked to practice 3 basic laparoscopic tasks for 6 weeks (BT group using a “take-home” box trainer; VR group using VRS in clinical skills centres). After the practice period all performed two LC, one on a VRS and one on a BT; (i.e. post-training assessment). VRS provided metrics (total time (TT), number of movements (NOM) instrument tip path length (PL)) and expert video assessment of cholecystectomy in a BT (GOALS score) were recorded. Performance during pre- and post-training assessment was compared. Results: The BT group showed a significant improvement for all VRS metrics (p=0.008) and the efficiency category of GOALS score (p=0.03). Only TT improved in the VRS group and none of the GOALS categories demonstrated a statistically significant improvement after training. Finally, the improvement in VRS metrics in the BT group was significantly greater than in the VR group (TT p=0.005, NOM p=0.042, PL p=0.031) although there were no differences in the GOALS scores between the groups. Conclusion: This study suggests that a basic “take-home” BTs is a suitable alternative to VRSs.
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)