Loading…

Digitally enhanced hands-on surgical training (DEHST) enhances the performance during freehand nail distal interlocking

Purpose Freehand distal interlocking of intramedullary nails remains a challenging task. Recently, a new training device for digitally enhanced hands-on surgical training (DEHST) was introduced, potentially improving surgical skills needed for distal interlocking. Aim To evaluate whether training wi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery 2024-04, Vol.144 (4), p.1611-1619
Main Authors: Pastor, Torsten, Cattaneo, Emanuele, Pastor, Tatjana, Gueorguiev, Boyko, Beeres, Frank J. P., Link, Björn-Christian, Windolf, Markus, Buschbaum, Jan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose Freehand distal interlocking of intramedullary nails remains a challenging task. Recently, a new training device for digitally enhanced hands-on surgical training (DEHST) was introduced, potentially improving surgical skills needed for distal interlocking. Aim To evaluate whether training with DEHST enhances the performance of novices (first-year residents without surgical experience in freehand distal nail interlocking). Methods Twenty novices were randomly assigned to two groups and performed distal interlocking of a tibia nail in mock operation under operation-room-like conditions. Participants in Group 1 were trained with DEHST (five distal interlocking attempts, 1 h of training), while those in Group 2 did not receive training. Time, number of X-rays shots, hole roundness in the X-rays projection and hit rates were compared between the groups. Results Time to complete the task [414.7 s (range 290–615)] and X-rays exposure [17.8 µGcm 2 (range 9.8–26.4)] were significantly lower in Group 1 compared to Group 2 [623.4 s (range 339–1215), p  = 0.041 and 32.6 µGcm 2 (range 16.1–55.3), p  = 0.003]. Hole projections were significantly rounder in Group 1 [95.0% (range 91.1–98.0) vs. 80.8% (range 70.1–88.9), p  
ISSN:1434-3916
0936-8051
1434-3916
DOI:10.1007/s00402-024-05208-6