评估外科医生对体腔内吻合术的教学态度。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-07 DOI:10.1089/lap.2024.0192
Meet Patel, Zainab Naseem, Christopher J Young
{"title":"评估外科医生对体腔内吻合术的教学态度。","authors":"Meet Patel, Zainab Naseem, Christopher J Young","doi":"10.1089/lap.2024.0192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> There is a controversy in minimally invasive colorectal procedures regarding choosing optimal technique between intra-corporeal (ICA) and extra-corporeal anastomosis (ECA). Previous studies recognize the short-term benefits in right hemicolectomy with intra-corporeal approach; however, ICA can result in increased operative difficulty. The aim of this study is to understand attitudes towards teaching ICA in colorectal procedures and how this varies between subspeciality training. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Active members of General Surgeons Australia were contacted through email to participate in a voluntary, unincentivized survey. Demographic details were collected and participants were asked to rate agreement for simulation-based training for increasing adoption of ICA through a Likert scale and when preferences for teaching ICA. Descriptive statistics were completed to describe frequencies and ordinal regression was completed to determine factors for Likert scale question. <b><i>Results:</i></b> There were 43 respondents and most participants recognized that ECA was easier to teach trainees and should be taught first. 53.5% of respondents recognized that simulation-based training would assist the adoption of ICA. Surgeons who routinely close bowel or enteric defects intra-corporeally are 354% more likely to show an interest in simulation-based training for adopting ICA, however, surgeons who are not involved in teaching trainees did not show an interest in simulation-based training. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> There is significant agreement that ECA forms the basis to learn ICA and simulation-based training would assist with the uptake of ICA. However, a multimodal approach, including expanding training avenues and providing financial incentives, would be necessary to enhance the adoption of ICA in colorectal surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":50166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","volume":" ","pages":"736-739"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Surgeons' Attitude to Teaching Intra-Corporeal Anastomosis.\",\"authors\":\"Meet Patel, Zainab Naseem, Christopher J Young\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/lap.2024.0192\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> There is a controversy in minimally invasive colorectal procedures regarding choosing optimal technique between intra-corporeal (ICA) and extra-corporeal anastomosis (ECA). Previous studies recognize the short-term benefits in right hemicolectomy with intra-corporeal approach; however, ICA can result in increased operative difficulty. The aim of this study is to understand attitudes towards teaching ICA in colorectal procedures and how this varies between subspeciality training. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Active members of General Surgeons Australia were contacted through email to participate in a voluntary, unincentivized survey. Demographic details were collected and participants were asked to rate agreement for simulation-based training for increasing adoption of ICA through a Likert scale and when preferences for teaching ICA. Descriptive statistics were completed to describe frequencies and ordinal regression was completed to determine factors for Likert scale question. <b><i>Results:</i></b> There were 43 respondents and most participants recognized that ECA was easier to teach trainees and should be taught first. 53.5% of respondents recognized that simulation-based training would assist the adoption of ICA. Surgeons who routinely close bowel or enteric defects intra-corporeally are 354% more likely to show an interest in simulation-based training for adopting ICA, however, surgeons who are not involved in teaching trainees did not show an interest in simulation-based training. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> There is significant agreement that ECA forms the basis to learn ICA and simulation-based training would assist with the uptake of ICA. However, a multimodal approach, including expanding training avenues and providing financial incentives, would be necessary to enhance the adoption of ICA in colorectal surgery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"736-739\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2024.0192\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2024.0192","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:在微创结直肠手术中,关于在体腔内(ICA)和体外吻合(ECA)之间选择最佳技术存在争议。以往的研究认为,采用体腔内方法进行右半结肠切除术在短期内获益匪浅;但是,ICA 可能会增加手术难度。本研究旨在了解在结直肠手术中教授 ICA 的态度,以及不同亚专科培训之间的差异。方法:通过电子邮件联系澳大利亚普通外科医生协会(General Surgeons Australia)的活跃会员,让他们参加一项自愿、无激励的调查。调查收集了详细的人口统计学信息,并要求参与者通过李克特量表对是否同意通过模拟培训来提高ICA的采用率以及对ICA教学的偏好进行评分。通过描述性统计来描述频率,并通过序数回归来确定李克特量表问题的因素。结果:共有 43 位受访者,大多数受访者认为 ECA 更容易教授学员,应首先教授 ECA。53.5% 的受访者认为模拟培训有助于采用 ICA。经常在体腔内关闭肠道或肠道缺损的外科医生对采用 ICA 的模拟培训表现出兴趣的可能性要高出 354%,然而,不参与向受训者传授知识的外科医生对模拟培训没有表现出兴趣。结论:大家一致认为,ECA 是学习 ICA 的基础,而基于模拟的培训将有助于 ICA 的普及。然而,要提高结直肠手术中 ICA 的采用率,必须采取多模式方法,包括扩大培训途径和提供经济激励。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing Surgeons' Attitude to Teaching Intra-Corporeal Anastomosis.

Introduction: There is a controversy in minimally invasive colorectal procedures regarding choosing optimal technique between intra-corporeal (ICA) and extra-corporeal anastomosis (ECA). Previous studies recognize the short-term benefits in right hemicolectomy with intra-corporeal approach; however, ICA can result in increased operative difficulty. The aim of this study is to understand attitudes towards teaching ICA in colorectal procedures and how this varies between subspeciality training. Methods: Active members of General Surgeons Australia were contacted through email to participate in a voluntary, unincentivized survey. Demographic details were collected and participants were asked to rate agreement for simulation-based training for increasing adoption of ICA through a Likert scale and when preferences for teaching ICA. Descriptive statistics were completed to describe frequencies and ordinal regression was completed to determine factors for Likert scale question. Results: There were 43 respondents and most participants recognized that ECA was easier to teach trainees and should be taught first. 53.5% of respondents recognized that simulation-based training would assist the adoption of ICA. Surgeons who routinely close bowel or enteric defects intra-corporeally are 354% more likely to show an interest in simulation-based training for adopting ICA, however, surgeons who are not involved in teaching trainees did not show an interest in simulation-based training. Conclusion: There is significant agreement that ECA forms the basis to learn ICA and simulation-based training would assist with the uptake of ICA. However, a multimodal approach, including expanding training avenues and providing financial incentives, would be necessary to enhance the adoption of ICA in colorectal surgery.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
163
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques (JLAST) is the leading international peer-reviewed journal for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest thinking and advanced surgical technologies in laparoscopy, endoscopy, NOTES, and robotics. The Journal is ideally suited to surgeons who are early adopters of new technology and techniques. Recognizing that many new technologies and techniques have significant overlap with several surgical specialties, JLAST is the first journal to focus on these topics both in general and pediatric surgery, and includes other surgical subspecialties such as: urology, gynecologic surgery, thoracic surgery, and more.
期刊最新文献
Application of Intraoperative Ultrasound in Laparoscopic Liver Resection with Pringle Maneuver: A Comparative Study with the Pringle Maneuver. Short-Term Efficacy of LCBDE+LC Versus ERCP/EST+LC in the Treatment of Cholelithiasis Combined with Common Bile Duct Stones: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Evaluation of Surgical Results and Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Transabdominal Preperitoneal and Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Approaches in Bilateral Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Randomized Analysis. Is Endoscopic Resection Essential for Patients with Type 1 Gastric Neuroendocrine Tumor? Is It Necessary to Endoscopically Evaluate the Anastomosis in Robotic or Laparoscopic Surgical Procedures for Colorectal Cancer?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1