↓ Skip to main content

Teamtraining und Assessment im Mixed-reality-basierten simulierten OP

Overview of attention for article published in Die Unfallchirurgie, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Teamtraining und Assessment im Mixed-reality-basierten simulierten OP
Published in
Die Unfallchirurgie, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00113-018-0467-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

P. Stefan, M. Pfandler, P. Wucherer, S. Habert, J. Fürmetz, S. Weidert, E. Euler, U. Eck, M. Lazarovici, M. Weigl, N. Navab

Abstract

Surgical simulators are being increasingly used as an attractive alternative to clinical training in addition to conventional animal models and human specimens. Typically, surgical simulation technology is designed for the purpose of teaching technical surgical skills (so-called task trainers). Simulator training in surgery is therefore in general limited to the individual training of the surgeon and disregards the participation of the rest of the surgical team. The objective of the project Assessment and Training of Medical Experts based on Objective Standards (ATMEOS) is to develop an immersive simulated operating room environment that enables the training and assessment of multidisciplinary surgical teams under various conditions. Using a mixed reality approach, a synthetic patient model, real surgical instruments and radiation-free virtual X‑ray imaging are combined into a simulation of spinal surgery. In previous research studies, the concept was evaluated in terms of realism, plausibility and immersiveness. In the current research, assessment measurements for technical and non-technical skills are developed and evaluated. The aim is to observe multidisciplinary surgical teams in the simulated operating room during minimally invasive spinal surgery and objectively assess the performance of the individual team members and the entire team. Moreover, the effectiveness of training methods and surgical techniques or success critical factors, e. g. management of crisis situations, can be captured and objectively assessed in the controlled environment.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 21%
Other 2 14%
Student > Master 2 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 29%
Engineering 3 21%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Unknown 5 36%
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 15 March 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Die Unfallchirurgie
#439
of 819 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#310,964
of 351,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Die Unfallchirurgie
#7
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 819 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.7. 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 351,767 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 40 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.