May 2006
Volume 47, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2006
The EYESI 2.2 Ophthalmosurgical Simulator: Is it a Good Teaching Tool?
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • L. Park
    Ophthalmology, New York University School of Medicine, Manhattan Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital, New York, NY
  • J.J. Song
    Ophthalmology, New York University School of Medicine, Manhattan Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital, New York, NY
  • J.M. Dodick
    Ophthalmology, New York University School of Medicine, Manhattan Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital, New York, NY
  • E.M. Helveston
    Ophthalmology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN
    ORBIS, New York, NY
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  L. Park, None; J.J. Song, None; J.M. Dodick, None; E.M. Helveston, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  Research to Prevent Blindness, New York, New York
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2006, Vol.47, 4421. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      L. Park, J.J. Song, J.M. Dodick, E.M. Helveston; The EYESI 2.2 Ophthalmosurgical Simulator: Is it a Good Teaching Tool? . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47(13):4421.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To evaluate the ability of the EYESI 2.2 ophthalmosurgical simulator to mimic intraocular surgical conditions, and assess its potential usefulness in training residents for intraocular surgery.

Methods: : Ophthalmology residents at different levels of training (PGY–2 to PGY–4) and with varying degrees of intraocular surgical experience performed a basic vitreo–retinal surgery module on the EYESI 2.2 ophthalmosurgical simulator. The module consisted of 5 basic tasks and levels: navigation training levels 1 and 2, forceps training, vitrector training, and anti–tremor training. The residents' performances, as assessed by their course scores, were compared to those of a practicing vitreo–retinal surgeon and a medical retina fellow.

Results: : Twelve residents (three PGY–4 residents, five PGY–3 residents and four PGY–2 residents), one practicing vitreo–retinal surgeon, and one medical retina fellow participated in the study and were grouped by level of training. Out of a possible high score of 500, the vitreo–retinal surgeon received the highest score of 406, followed by the fellow's score of 354. As a group, the average score for PGY–4 residents was 339; for PGY–3 residents was 331; for PGY–2 residents was 261. When evaluated by group, higher course scores correlated with years of prior intraocular surgical experience. The more experienced intraocular surgeons reported that they felt the simulator to be an excellent supplemental teaching tool for intraocular surgery.

Conclusions: : The EYESI 2.2 ophthalmosurgical simulator is a useful device for training ophthalmology residents in intraocular surgery and merits further investigation as a unique surgical teaching tool.

Keywords: clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: health care delivery/economics/manpower • learning 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×