File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2012.05.003
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-84869233064
- PMID: 23036541
- WOS: WOS:000310417100006
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: A comparison of hand- and foot-activated surgical tools in simulated ophthalmic surgery
Title | A comparison of hand- and foot-activated surgical tools in simulated ophthalmic surgery |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 2012 |
Citation | Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology, 2012, v. 47, n. 5, p. 414-417 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Objective: To compare the performance characteristics of hand-activated surgical tools with those of foot-activated surgical tools using a virtual-reality simulator of intraocular surgery. Design: Prospective, unmasked, interventional cohort study. Participants: Eighteen ophthalmology residents at the University of Toronto. Methods: The EYESi ophthalmic surgery simulator was used for the study. The surgical tool evaluated was a simulation of intraocular forceps activated by either a handpiece or a foot pedal. Each resident completed 2 modules - a dexterity module and a capsulorrhexis/ cataract module. Each module was completed 4 times, alternating between the hand-activated forceps and the foot-activated forceps. An overall score was calculated for each task on the basis of the efficiency and accuracy of completion of the task, with 100 representing a perfect score. Overall scores were compared between hand and foot control for both modules. Results: For the dexterity module, there was no significant difference in the overall scores between the 2 groups (91 ± 6 and 93 ± 6 for the foot- and hand-activated forceps groups, respectively; p > 0.05, t test). For the capsulorrhexis module, overall scores were also similar for both groups, the scores being 50 ± 21 and 53 ± 16 for the foot- and hand-activated forceps groups, respectively (p > 0.05, t test). An exit survey of the study's participants revealed that subjects did not have a preference for the hand or foot modality of the forceps tool, with 10 preferring the hand-activated forceps tool and 8 preferring the foot-activated tool. Conclusions: During simulated intraocular surgery, foot- and hand-activated surgical tools appear to have similar performance characteristics and are equally well received by residents. © 2012 Canadian Ophthalmological Society. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/228147 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 3.3 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.753 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Podbielski, Dominik W. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Noble, Jason | - |
dc.contributor.author | Gill, Harmeet S. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Sit, Marisa | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lam, Wai Ching | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2016-08-01T06:45:18Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2016-08-01T06:45:18Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2012 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology, 2012, v. 47, n. 5, p. 414-417 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0008-4182 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/228147 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Objective: To compare the performance characteristics of hand-activated surgical tools with those of foot-activated surgical tools using a virtual-reality simulator of intraocular surgery. Design: Prospective, unmasked, interventional cohort study. Participants: Eighteen ophthalmology residents at the University of Toronto. Methods: The EYESi ophthalmic surgery simulator was used for the study. The surgical tool evaluated was a simulation of intraocular forceps activated by either a handpiece or a foot pedal. Each resident completed 2 modules - a dexterity module and a capsulorrhexis/ cataract module. Each module was completed 4 times, alternating between the hand-activated forceps and the foot-activated forceps. An overall score was calculated for each task on the basis of the efficiency and accuracy of completion of the task, with 100 representing a perfect score. Overall scores were compared between hand and foot control for both modules. Results: For the dexterity module, there was no significant difference in the overall scores between the 2 groups (91 ± 6 and 93 ± 6 for the foot- and hand-activated forceps groups, respectively; p > 0.05, t test). For the capsulorrhexis module, overall scores were also similar for both groups, the scores being 50 ± 21 and 53 ± 16 for the foot- and hand-activated forceps groups, respectively (p > 0.05, t test). An exit survey of the study's participants revealed that subjects did not have a preference for the hand or foot modality of the forceps tool, with 10 preferring the hand-activated forceps tool and 8 preferring the foot-activated tool. Conclusions: During simulated intraocular surgery, foot- and hand-activated surgical tools appear to have similar performance characteristics and are equally well received by residents. © 2012 Canadian Ophthalmological Society. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology | - |
dc.title | A comparison of hand- and foot-activated surgical tools in simulated ophthalmic surgery | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.jcjo.2012.05.003 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 23036541 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-84869233064 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 47 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 5 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 414 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 417 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1715-3360 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000310417100006 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 0008-4182 | - |