↓ Skip to main content

Impact of simulation-based training in surgical chest tube insertion on a model of traumatic pneumothorax

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Simulation, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
Impact of simulation-based training in surgical chest tube insertion on a model of traumatic pneumothorax
Published in
Advances in Simulation, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41077-016-0021-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexandre Léger, Aiham Ghazali, Franck Petitpas, Youcef Guéchi, Amélie Boureau-Voultoury, Denis Oriot

Abstract

Chest tube insertion is required for most cases of traumatic pneumothorax. However, this procedure entails risks of potentially life-threatening complications. A "surgical" approach is widely recommended to minimize these risks. Simulation-based education has previously been used in surgical chest tube insertion, but not been subjected to rigorous evaluation. The primary objective was to evaluate the success rate of surgical chest tube insertion in a task trainer (previously published). Secondary objectives were to assess performance with a performance assessment scale (previously designed), to measure the time of insertion, and to seek out a correlation between the learner's status, experience, and performance and success rate. Participants were surveyed for realism of the model and satisfaction; 65 participants (18 residents, 47 senior physicians) were randomized into SIM+ or SIM- groups. Both groups received didactic lessons. The SIM+ group was assigned deliberate practice on the model under supervision. Both groups were assessed on the model 1 month later. There was no difference between the SIM+ (n = 34) and SIM- (n = 31) groups regarding status (p = 0.44) or previous surgical insertion (p = 0.12). Success rate was 97 % (SIM+) and 58 % (SIM-),p = 0.0002. Performance score was 16.29 ± 1.82 (SIM+) and 11.39 ± 3.67 (SIM-),p = 3.13 × 10-8. SIM+ presented shorter dissection time than SIM- (p = 0.047), but procedure time was similar (p = 0.71). Status or experience was not correlated with success rate, performance score, procedure time, or dissection time. SIM+ gained more self-confidence, judged the model more realistic, and were more satisfied than SIM-. Simulation-based education significantly improved the success rate and performance of surgical chest tube insertion on a traumatic pneumothorax model.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 3%
Unknown 37 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Other 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 12 32%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 18%
Unspecified 2 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 10 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 26 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,748,988
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Simulation
#140
of 234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,328
of 345,199 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Simulation
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 234 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 345,199 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.