Skip to content

A comparison of digital, visual, and visuospatial automated feedback systems in simulated bimanual surgical skills training

Effect of feedback modality on simulated surgical skills learning using automated educational systems

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ISRCTN
Registry ID
ISRCTN17590019
Enrollment
120
Registered
2022-11-01
Start date
2019-07-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2022-11-14

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Training bimanual surgical skills of medical students using virtual reality simulation and feedback Surgery

Interventions

This is a four-arm randomized controlled trial. Google online random number generator is used to determine participant group allocation between the four groups. Participants perform six simulated tumo

Sponsors

McGill University
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Students who are currently enrolled in medical schools.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: There are no exclusion criteria

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Learning measured using the total number of expert benchmarks achieved on previously validated 14 performance metrics with expert-level benchmarks, on a scale of 1 to 14, across five repetitions of the simulated task, assessed after the completion of each task

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Performance improvement measured using participant scores, across the five repetitions of the simulated task, on the 14 performance metrics, assessed after the completion of each task: 1. Brain volume removed (cc) 2. Amount of blood loss (cc) 3. Maximum force applied with the dominant hand (Newton) 4. Maximum force applied with a non-dominant hand (Newton) 5. Sum of forces applied with the dominant hand (Newton) 6. Sum of forces applied with a non-dominant hand (Newton) 7. Tumour percentage removed (%) 8. Total tip path length dominant hand (mm) 9. Total tip path length non-dominant hand (mm) 10. Path length index 11. Efficiency index 12. Average instrument tips separation distance (mm) 13. Coordination index 14. Bimanual forces ratio

Countries

Canada

Contacts

Public ContactRecai Yilmaz
recai.yilmaz@mail.com+1 (0)438 979 1299

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026