Virtual endoscopy simulator training reduces required assistance in gastroscopy training of novices (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.35–0.50, P<0.00001)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In one included RCT, 41% of novices in the simulator group required assistance during gastroscopy compared to 98% in the no-simulator group (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.35–0.50, P<0.00001). → Qiao Weiguang 2014

Evidence¶

Qiao Weiguang 2014¶

Qiao Weiguang, Bai Yang, Lv Ruxi, Zhang Wendi, Chen Yuqing, Lei Shan, Zhi Fachao. (2014). The Effect of Virtual Endoscopy Simulator Training on Novices: A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089224

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Meta-analysis of RCTs comparing simulator with conventional training; gastroscopy required-assistance outcome pooled from "1 study, 22 participants". The review reports "RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.35–0.50, P<0.00001" favouring simulator training.

"Forty-one per cent of participants in the simulator group required assistance compared to 98% of participants in the no simulator group (1 study, 22 participants, RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.35–0.50, P<0.00001; see Figure 6)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Virtual endoscopy simulator training shows no statistically significant benefit for independent procedure completion in colonoscopy training (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.88–1.37, P=0.41) — related
• Virtual endoscopy simulator training shows no statistically significant difference in total procedure time for colonoscopy (SMD 0.00, 95% CI −0.99–0.99, P=1.00) — related
• Virtual endoscopy simulator training is superior to no-simulator control for independent procedure completion in gastroscopy training of novices (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13–1.39, P<0.0001) — related
• Virtual endoscopy simulator training increases required assistance in colonoscopy training (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.38–4.55, P=0.002) — related