| Title |
Evaluation of resident’s training for endoscopic sinus surgery using a sheep’s head
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00405-015-3877-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Beatriz Delgado-Vargas, Azucena Lloris Romero-Salazar, Pablo M. Reyes Burneo, Catalina Vásquez Hincapie, Gonzalo de los Santos Granado, Raúl del Castillo López, Claudio Frágola Arnau, Ignacio Cobeta Marco |
| Abstract |
Training in functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) is an essential part of each ENT resident and it takes place on a very fragile area. This study focus on showing the learning curve of FESS, using an anatomical model such as the sheep's head. Four residents in our centre performed dissections. Each of these residents operated eight sheep's head. They performed an endoscopic septoplasty followed by maxillary antrostomy, total ethmoidectomy and frontal sinusotomy on every head. A staff member guided all procedures and checked for the appropriate dissection and complications occurred. Analysis was made upon the residents' performance of their first four septoplasties and eight nasal sides against their subsequent performance of the same. Final procedures presented better outcomes than the initial ones on every step of them. Results were measured by means of decrease of time (P < 0.0001) and complications, showing no major complications on the latest ones. Sheep's head is a suitable substitute for the cadaveric human head, to obtain the surgical skills needed for FESS procedures. Sheep's nasal cavity allows gaining dexterity and it is an easy model to obtain. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 27 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 17% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 48% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Decision Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 12 | 41% |
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 08 January 2016.
All research outputs
#20,300,248
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#2,026
of 3,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#330,512
of 393,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#26
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 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 3,073 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. 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 393,663 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 62 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.