↓ Skip to main content

The influence of prior laparoscopic experience on learning laparoendoscopic single site surgery: a prospective comparative preliminary study using cystorraphy in a live porcine model

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Urology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The influence of prior laparoscopic experience on learning laparoendoscopic single site surgery: a prospective comparative preliminary study using cystorraphy in a live porcine model
Published in
BMC Urology, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12894-017-0242-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

U-Syn Ha, Kyu Won Lee, Sun Wook Kim, Seung Hyun Jeon, Tae Gyun Kwon, Hyung Keun Park, Sung-Hoo Hong

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of prior laparoscopic experience on the ability to learn laparoendoscopic single site surgery (LESS) skills. A total of 33 urologists who completed a training program in LESS surgery were recruited for this study. After completing the educational course and training, the study participants demonstrated LESS suturing and knot-tying via a 2-cm cystotomy in a live porcine model for 15 min. An objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) was used to evaluate videos of each participant's procedure. The participants were divided according to laparoscopic experience; advanced experienced group (AS), intermediate experienced group (IS), novice group (NS). Three participants in the NS group completed the porcine cystorrhaphy in 15 min (30.0%), 3 (25.0%) completed the task in the IS group, and 3 (27.2%) completed it in the AS group. There were no statistically significant differences in the mean total OSATS quality score (NS; 16.7, IS; 18.5, AS; 16.8) among the 3 groups. Concerning all each assessment, there were also no statistically significant difference. Additionaly, the mean total OSATS quantity score (NS; 4.1, IS; 3.5, AS; 4.3) did not differ significantly among groups. The NS group succeeded a mean of 1.4 knots, the IS group succeeded 0.9, and the AS group 1.3 (p = 0.727). There was no significant difference among the groups in LESS proficiency after training. Surgeons who were novices in conventional laparoscopic surgery reached comparable scores to those of experienced laparoscopic surgeons after training.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 33%
Student > Master 2 22%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Unknown 3 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 44%
Engineering 1 11%
Unknown 4 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 July 2017.
All research outputs
#20,434,884
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from BMC Urology
#652
of 754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,528
of 312,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Urology
#12
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 754 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,615 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.