The potential of blended learning in education and training for advanced civilian and military trauma care

IntroductionIn the field of advanced care of the complex trauma patient, there is an emerging need for focused education and training. However, several hospitals do not support further education and training in this field, and the challenge of releasing time for physicians and nurses is well-known. Educational strategies using blended learning, which combines traditional classroom methods with modern computer-assisted methods and media, have not yet been widely used. This study analysed the educational challenges and areas for improvement, according to senior physicians and nurses, and investigated the potential use of blended learning.MethodThe setting was an international course, Definitive Surgical Trauma Care (DSTC) – Military Version, part of a programme which prepares health professionals for work during extreme conditions. The sample consisted of senior physicians and nurses, participating in the course in September 2015. A survey was completed, interviews were performed and a post-course survey was conducted 18 months later in March 2017.ResultsThe most difficult aspect of learning how to manage the complex trauma patient, was the lack of real practice. Even though the respondents were knowledgeable in advanced trauma, they lacked personal experience in managing complex trauma cases. Cases presented during the course represented significantly greater complexity of injury compared to those usually seen in hospitals and during military deployment. The following educational challenges were identified from the study: (1) Lack of experience and knowledge of advanced trauma care. (2) Lack of the use of blended learning as support for education and training. (3) Limited time available for preparation and reflection in the education and training process. (4) Lack of support for such education and training from home hospitals. (5) The unfulfilled requirement for multidisciplinary team-training in the military medical environment.ConclusionEducational strategies and methods, such as blended learning can support education and training, and the learning process by unlimited practice in reasoning and decision making in virtual patients. It can also provide flexibility and mobility for senior health professionals and their home hospitals, and contribute to an improved military pre-deployment training with less time strain on the civilian home hospitals.     

The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review

Background  Virtual reality (VR) as surgical training tool has become a state-of-the-art technique in training and teaching skills for minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Although intuitively appealing, the true benefits of haptic (VR training) platforms are unknown. Many questions about haptic feedback in the different areas of surgical skills (training) need to be answered before adding costly haptic feedback in VR simulation for MIS training. This study was designed to review the current status and value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted MIS and training by using virtual reality simulation. Methods  A systematic review of the literature was undertaken using PubMed and MEDLINE. The following search terms were used: Haptic feedback OR Haptics OR Force feedback AND/OR Minimal Invasive Surgery AND/OR Minimal Access Surgery AND/OR Robotics AND/OR Robotic Surgery AND/OR Endoscopic Surgery AND/OR Virtual Reality AND/OR Simulation OR Surgical Training/Education. Results  The results were assessed according to level of evidence as reflected by the Oxford Centre of Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. Conclusions  In the current literature, no firm consensus exists on the importance of haptic feedback in performing minimally invasive surgery. Although the majority of the results show positive assessment of the benefits of force feedback, results are ambivalent and not unanimous on the subject. Benefits are least disputed when related to surgery using robotics, because there is no haptic feedback in currently used robotics. The addition of haptics is believed to reduce surgical errors resulting from a lack of it, especially in knot tying. Little research has been performed in the area of robot-assisted endoscopic surgical training, but results seem promising. Concerning VR training, results indicate that haptic feedback is important during the early phase of psychomotor skill acquisition.     

Management of civilian and military vascular trauma: lessons learned

Management of vascular trauma has evolved tremendously since the turn of the 20(th) century. The lessons from each major military conflict over the past 100 years have refined our understanding of how to care for soldiers and civilians with vascular injuries. The recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have likewise improved our strategy for treating victims of vascular trauma. Understanding the principles that guide management of vascular injuries will result in preservation of life and limb.     

Virtual reality-based simulators for spine surgery: a systematic review

Background Context

Virtual reality (VR)-based simulators offer numerous benefits and are very useful in assessing and training surgical skills. Virtual reality-based simulators are standard in some surgical subspecialties, but their actual use in spinal surgery remains unclear. Currently, only technical reviews of VR-based simulators are available for spinal surgery.

Prevalence of haptic feedback in robot-mediated surgery: a systematic review of literature

With the successful uptake and inclusion of robotic systems in minimally invasive surgery and with the increasing application of robotic surgery (RS) in numerous surgical specialities worldwide, there is now a need to develop and enhance the technology further. One such improvement is the implementation and amalgamation of haptic feedback technology into RS which will permit the operating surgeon on the console to receive haptic information on the type of tissue being operated on. The main advantage of using this is to allow the operating surgeon to feel and control the amount of force applied to different tissues during surgery thus minimising the risk of tissue damage due to both the direct and indirect effects of excessive tissue force or tension being applied during RS. We performed a two-rater systematic review to identify the latest developments and potential avenues of improving technology in the application and implementation of haptic feedback technology to the operating surgeon on the console during RS. This review provides a summary of technological enhancements in RS, considering different stages of work, from proof of concept to cadaver tissue testing, surgery in animals, and finally real implementation in surgical practice. We identify that at the time of this review, while there is a unanimous agreement regarding need for haptic and tactile feedback, there are no solutions or products available that address this need. There is a scope and need for new developments in haptic augmentation for robot-mediated surgery with the aim of improving patient care and robotic surgical technology further.     

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colorectal disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundLaparoscopic colorectal surgery remains one of the most challenging techniques to learn.MethodsThe authors collected studies that have compared hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) and open surgery for the treatment of colorectal disease over the past 17 years. Data of interest for HALS and open surgery were subjected to meta-analysis.ResultsTwelve studies that included 1,362 patients were studied. In total, 2.66% of HALS procedures were converted to laparotomy. Compared with the open surgery group, blood loss, rate of wound infection, and ileus in the HALS group decreased, and incision length, recovery of gastrointestinal function, and hospitalization period were shorter. There were no significant differences in operating time, hospitalization costs, mortality, and complications, including urinary tract infection, pneumonia, and anastomotic leak, between the groups.ConclusionsHALS has the advantages of minimal invasion, lower blood loss, shorter incision length, and faster recovery, and it can shorten the length of hospitalization without an increase in costs. The drawbacks are that a small number of patients who undergo HALS may need to be converted to laparotomy, and the oncologic safety and long-term prognosis are not clear.     

Current status of simulation-based training in pediatric surgery: A systematic review

BackgroundSimulation based training enables pediatric surgical trainees to attain proficiency in surgical skills. This study aims to identify the currently available simulators for pediatric surgery, assess their validation and strength of evidence supporting each model.MethodsBoth Medline and EMBASE were searched for English language articles either describing or validating simulation models for pediatric surgery. A level of evidence (LoE) followed by a level of recommendation (LoR) was assigned to each validation study and simulator, based on a modified Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification for educational studies.ResultsForty-nine articles were identified describing 44 training models and courses. Of these articles, 44 were validation studies. Face validity was evaluated by 20 studies, 28 for content, 24 demonstrated construct validity and 1 showed predictive validity. Of the validated models, 3 were given an LoR of 2, 21 an LoR of 3 and 12 an LoR of 4. None reached the highest LoR.ConclusionsThere are a growing number of simulators specific to pediatric surgery. However, these simulators have limited LoE and LoR in current studies. The lack of NoTSS training is also apparent. We advocate more randomized trials to validate these models, and attempts to determine predictive validity.Type of studyOriginal / systematic review.Level of evidence1.     

Extended,virtual and augmented reality in thoracic surgery: a systematic review

 Open in a separate windowOBJECTIVESExtended reality (XR), encompassing both virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality, allows the user to interact with a computer-generated environment based on reality. In essence, the immersive nature of VR and augmented reality technology has been warmly welcomed in all aspects of medicine, gradually becoming increasingly feasible to incorporate into everyday practice. In recent years, XR has become increasingly adopted in thoracic surgery, although the extent of its applications is unclear. Here, we aim to review the current applications of XR in thoracic surgery.METHODSA systematic database search was conducted of original articles that explored the use of VR and/or augmented reality in thoracic surgery in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane database and Google Scholar, from inception to December 2020.RESULTSOur search yielded 1494 citations, of which 21 studies published from 2007 to 2019 were included in this review. Three main areas were identified: (i) the application of XR in thoracic surgery training; (ii) preoperative planning of thoracic procedures; and (iii) intraoperative assistance. Overall, XR could produce progression along the learning curve, enabling trainees to reach acceptable standards before performing in the operating theatre. Preoperatively, through the generation of 3D-renderings of the thoracic cavity and lung anatomy, VR increases procedural accuracy and surgical confidence through familiarization of the patient’s anatomy. XR-assisted surgery may have therapeutic use particularly for complex cases, where conventional methods would yield inadequate outcomes due to inferior accuracy.CONCLUSIONXR represents a salient step towards improving thoracic surgical training, as well as enhancing preoperative planning and intraoperative guidance.     

Current status of augmented reality in cerebrovascular surgery: a systematic review

Neurosurgical Review - Augmented reality (AR) is an adjuvant tool in neuronavigation to improve spatial and anatomic understanding. The present review aims to describe the current status of...     

Complication rates of minimally invasive spine surgery compared to open surgery: A systematic literature review

The use of minimally invasive techniques in spine surgery has garnered much attention since it was first described over 30 years ago. The purported benefits include superior cosmesis, reduced blood loss, decreased pain, less soft tissue damage, reduced muscle retraction, decreased use of postoperative narcotics, shorter duration of hospital stays, and quicker recovery. While much attention has been paid to the purported benefits, there is a paucity of literature comparing the potential complications of MIS with traditional surgery. In this systematic literature review postoperative complications of MIS are directly compared with those of traditional techniques. A literature search was conducted searching Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Collaboration Library for literature since 1990 for discussing complications associated with MIS. Studies were included if they were at least level 2 evidence according to the USPSTF guidelines, they were in the English language, and were sentinel procedures. The data from the studies were pooled into a single homogenous group for each complication in order to look at the overall rates of each individual complication. After our literature search, 460 overall citations were found. Applying our inclusion/exclusion criteria left 14 publications for review. Overall complication rates were not statistically significant between MIS and traditional groups. The incidence of dural tears was 1.1% (26/1339) in patients undergoing MIS versus 2.1% (20/939) for traditional surgery (p = 0.57). The incidence of infection was 1.1% (19/1682) in patients undergoing MIS versus 2.2% (29/1332) for traditional surgery (p = 0.09). The incidence of screw malposition was 2.8% (3/106) in patients undergoing MIS versus 1% (1/102) for traditional surgery (p = 0.48). The incidence of root injury was 2.9% (2/70) in patients undergoing MIS versus 0% (0/142) for traditional surgery (p = 0.45). The incidence of need for revision surgery was 3.8% (25/662) in patients undergoing MIS versus 3.2% (26/819) for traditional surgery (p = 0.93). MIS did not confer any statistically significant advantage over traditional surgery for any of the complications reviewed.     

Carbon fibre reinforced PEEK versus traditional metallic implants for orthopaedic trauma surgery: A systematic review

IntroductionThere is no literature review comparing outcomes of fixation using carbon-fibre-reinforced polyetheretherketone (CFR PEEK) compared to metal implants used in orthopaedic extremity trauma surgery. A systematic review was performed to compare CFR PEEK to metal implants for clinically-important fracture outcomes.MethodsA search of the online databases of PubMed/Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Database was conducted. A systematic review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A meta-analyses was performed for functional outcomes in proximal humerus fractures converting the score differences to standard mean difference units. GRADE approach was used to determine the level of certainty of the estimates.ResultsTwo prospective randomised controlled trials and seven comparative observational studies with a total of 431 patients were included. Of the nine studies included, four compared the use of CFR PEEK against metal plates in proximal humerus fractures. Aggregated functional scores across the proximal humerus studies, there was a small signal of better improvement with CFR PEEK (SMD 0.22, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.47, p = 0.08, low certainty). Greater odds of adverse events occurred in the metal group (OR 2.34, 95% CI 0.73 to 7.55, p = 0.15, low certainty).ConclusionsLow to very low certainty evidence suggests a small improvement in functional recovery with CFR PEEK in proximal humerus fractures. This may be mediated through a small reduction in major adverse events related to fracture healing and stability. There is currently insufficient evidence to support the widespread use of CFR PEEK implants in fracture fixation.Level of evidenceLevel IV.