Simulator fidelity does not significantly affect improvement rates in coronary anastomosis simulation training¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Subgroup analyses found no significant difference in time or score improvement between high- and low-fidelity simulators (score comparison P = 0.67). → O'Dwyer M 2022

Evidence¶

O'Dwyer M 2022¶

O'Dwyer M, Fleming CA, Ahern S, Barrett S, Raftery NB, Ní Dhonnchú T, Doddakula K. (2022). Objective improvement with coronary anastomosis simulation training: meta-analysis. BJS Open. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrab147

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Subgroup analysis comparing score improvement between high-fidelity and low-fidelity simulator trials (Fig. 4). The article reports "no significant difference between groups" with P = 0.67, and states heterogeneity scores made this difficult to interpret; equivalence was not tested.

"In subgroup analysis of score improvement between high- and low-fidelity simulators, there was no significant difference between groups in subgroup differences (P = 0.67) (Fig. 4)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Junior and non-cardiothoracic residents show larger time improvements from coronary anastomosis simulation than senior residents — related
• The coronary anastomosis learning curve on a simulator stabilizes after about 30 anastomoses — related
• Simulation improves trainee scores on individual technical subtasks of coronary anastomosis — related
• Coronary anastomosis simulation training is associated with higher objective skill scores than no formal simulation training — related
• Simulation Based Education Improves Outcomes — related