Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T09:03:18.586Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A low-cost alternative for nasolaryngoscopy simulation training equipment: a randomised controlled trial

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 September 2015

D I Johnston ,
V Selimi ,
A Chang  and
M Smith
D I Johnston*
Affiliation:
ENT Department, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
V Selimi
Affiliation:
ENT Department, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
A Chang
Affiliation:
ENT Department, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
M Smith
Affiliation:
ENT Department, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
*
Address for correspondence: Mr D I Johnston, ENT Department, Box48, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK Fax: +44 1223 217 559 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives:

Flexible nasolaryngoscopy is a key diagnostic procedure used in many specialities. Simulation-based teaching is beneficial for endoscopy training, but it is expensive. This study assessed whether an inexpensive simulation model is an effective training method for flexible nasolaryngoscopy.

Methods:

A three-armed, randomised, controlled trial was performed. One group received no simulation training, while two others were trained with either a high-cost or a low-cost model. All candidates then performed flexible nasolaryngoscopy on a volunteer. Their ability to perform this task was assessed by the patient discomfort score and time taken by a blinded expert.

Results:

Simulation-based teaching reduced patient discomfort and improved candidate skill level. Low-cost model training did not have a negative effect when compared with high-cost model training.

Conclusion:

Simulated flexible nasolaryngoscopy training may be more accessible with the use of an effective low-cost model.

Keywords

EndoscopyEducation, TrainingCost Control
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 129 , Issue 11 , November 2015 , pp. 1101 - 1107
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Nankivell, PC, Pothier, DD. Nasal and instrument preparation prior to rigid and flexible nasendoscopy: a systematic review. J Laryngol Otol 2008;122:1024–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Sturm, LP, Windsor, JA, Cosman, PH, Cregan, P, Hewett, PJ, Maddern, GJ. A systematic review of skills transfer after surgical simulation training. Ann Surg 2008;248:166–79CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Rozman, A, Duh, S, Petrinec-Primozic, M, Triller, N. Flexible bronchoscope damage and repair costs in a bronchoscopy teaching unit. Respiration 2009;77:325–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Zendejas, B, Wang, AT, Brydges, R, Hamstra, SJ, Cook, DA. Cost: the missing outcome in simulation-based medical education research: a systematic review. Surgery 2013;153:160–76CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Langeron, A, Mercier, G, Lima, S, Chauleur, C, Golfier, F, Seffert, P et al. A new low-cost webcam-based laparoscopic training model [in French]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2012;40:396–401CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Andreatta, P, Marzano, DA, Curran, DS, Klotz, JJ, Gamble, CR, Reynolds, RK. Low-hanging fruit: a clementine as a simulation model for advanced laparoscopy. Simul Healthc 2014;9:234–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Trivedi, JN. An economical model for mastering the art of intubation with different video laryngoscopes. Indian J Anaesth 2014;58:394–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8Kiely, DJ, Stephanson, K, Ross, S. Assessing image quality of low-cost laparoscopic box trainers: options for residents training at home. Simul Healthc 2011;6:292–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9Burge, SD, Bunegin, L, Weitzel, EK, McMains, KC. The validation of an endoscopic sinus surgery skills training model: a pilot study. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2012;26:409–13CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Smith, ME, Leung, BC, Sharma, R, Nazeer, S, McFerran, DJ. A randomized controlled trial of nasolaryngoscopy training techniques. Laryngoscope 2014;124:2034–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Benadom, EM, Potter, NL. The use of simulation in training graduate students to perform transnasal endoscopy. Dysphagia 2011;26:352–60CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12Howes, BW, Repanos, C. A low-cost, endoscopic, digital, still and video photography system for ENT clinics. J Laryngol Otol 2010;124:543–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Breivik, EK, Bjornsson, GA, Skovlund, E. A comparison of pain rating scales by sampling from clinical trial data. Clin J Pain 2000;16:22–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Nagendran, M, Gurusamy, KS, Aggarwal, R, Loizidou, M, Davidson, BR. Virtual reality training for surgical trainees in laparoscopic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;(8):CD006575CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Zendejas, B, Brydges, R, Hamstra, SJ, Cook, DA. State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surg 2013;257:586–93CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16Sedlack, RE, Kolars, JC, Alexander, JA. Computer simulation training enhances patient comfort during endoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004;2:348–52CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17Walsh, CM, Sherlock, ME, Ling, SC, Carnahan, H. Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;(6):CD008237CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18Park, SH, Suh, IH, Chien, JH, Paik, J, Ritter, FE, Oleynikov, D et al. Modeling surgical skill learning with cognitive simulation. Stud Health Technol Inform 2011;163:428–32Google ScholarPubMed