Comparison of 2-Dimensional and New Generation 3-Dimensional Laparoscopic Visions In An Experimental Model
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Diagnostic Self Evaluation
- Sponsor
- Bagcilar Training and Research Hospital
- Enrollment
- 24
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- In order to test whether the 3-D laparoscopy vision system is superior or not than the 2-D laparoscopic vision system.
- Status
- Completed
- Last Updated
- 12 years ago
Overview
Brief Summary
This study tests the hypothesis that use of the 3-D laparoscopic vision system (Viking Systems, La Jolla, CA) can significantly improve technical ability on a complex laparoscopic tasks in an experimental model.
Detailed Description
7 tasks on a 3-D laparoscopic instrument fitted to the trainer box and subjective criteria (4 point lickert scale) were evaluated for this study. Totally twenty-four participants (8 experienced, 8 minimal experienced and 8 novices) were evaluated for different 10 tasks (touch the marked circle, pass the two circle with needle, pick-beads and place, grape the suture, move the needle from one instrument to another instrument, pick-and-place, cutting, three different suturing) in term of total task time and error number. Statistical Package Program was used to perform statistical analyses. The data were presented as arithmetic means and standard deviations were calculated in each group. A P value of \<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
Investigators
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •medical doctors
Exclusion Criteria
- •disabled person (about arms or vision problems)
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
In order to test whether the 3-D laparoscopy vision system is superior or not than the 2-D laparoscopic vision system.
Time Frame: 15 days
We want to test the 3-D laparoscopic vision system (Viking Systems, La Jolla, CA) can significantly improve technical ability on a complex laparoscopic tasks in an experimental model. 7 tasks on a 3-D laparoscopic instrument fitted to the trainer box and subjective criteria (4 point lickert scale) were evaluated for this study. Totally twenty-four participants (8 experienced, 8 minimal experienced and 8 novices) were evaluated for different 10 tasks in term of total task time and error number.