↓ Skip to main content

Basic skin surgery interactive simulation: system description and randomised educational trial

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Simulation, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Basic skin surgery interactive simulation: system description and randomised educational trial
Published in
Advances in Simulation, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s41077-018-0074-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hasan Naveed, Richard Hudson, Manaf Khatib, Fernando Bello

Abstract

Learning the skills required for open surgery is essential for trainee progression towards more advanced technical procedures. Simulation supports skill enhancement at a time when exposure to actual surgical procedures and traditional apprentice-based teaching has declined. The proliferation of smartphone and tablet devices with rich, touch sensitive displays and increasing processing power makes a compelling argument for expanding accessibility further by development of mobile virtual simulations for training on demand in any setting, at any time.We present a tablet-based mobile simulation App for educating surgical trainees in the planning and surgical procedures involved in facial lesion resection and local skin flap surgery. Novel algorithms were developed and modules included in a mobile simulation App to teach concepts required for three defect reconstruction techniques: elliptical closure, bilateral advancement (H flap) and the semi-circular rotation flap, with additional resources such as videos and formal guidelines made available at relevant points in the simulation. A randomised educational trial was conducted using the mobile simulation App with 18 medical students that were divided equally into two groups: the intervention group learning using the new mobile simulation App, and a control group, undergoing traditional text-based self-study. The students were then assessed on knowledge and skills' acquisition through an MCQ and a task analysis score. There was a statistically significant difference between the scores of students in the intervention group and the students in the non-intervention group in both forms of assessment, with an average multiple-choice assessment score of 62.95% points versus 56.73%, respectively (p = 0.0285), and an average task analysis score of 3.53 versus 2.58, respectively (p = 0.0139). Touch-based simulation provided an efficient and superior method of learning three different local flap techniques for facial soft tissue reconstruction, and helped recalling steps involved in the surgery in a fluid manner that also improved task performance.

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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Other 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 15 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Unspecified 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 18 38%
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 10 September 2018.
All research outputs
#18,643,992
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Simulation
#229
of 235 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,404
of 329,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Simulation
#10
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 235 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 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% 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 329,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.