The Utility of an Open-Access Surgical Simulator to Enhance Surgeon Training.

BACKGROUND: Smile Train, an international children's charity committed to improving cleft care around the world, empowers local medical professionals in developing countries to provide quality comprehensive cleft care in their own communities. As part of their sustainable model, Smile Train developed a web-based, interactive virtual simulator to improve surgical training of cleft procedures for surgeons around the world, replicating the anatomical and technical steps involved in cleft surgery. This study evaluated the simulator as a tool for enhancing surgical training. METHODS: A pre-test and questionnaire addressing cleft care, surgical knowledge, and confidence level was administered to surgeons-in-training at an academic institution. Participants completed 3 simulator modules followed by a post-test and questionnaire to measure changes in knowledge and confidence levels. RESULTS: Sixteen surgeons-in-training participated in this study. The mean score on the knowledge examination increased after reviewing the modules for both junior residents (33.1%-64.4%) and senior residents (46.9%-70.8%). Reviewing the modules increased participants' confidence in the knowledge of cleft anatomy, understanding of surgical procedures, and ability to follow along meaningfully while assisting in operations. CONCLUSIONS: The Smile Train Virtual Surgery Simulator increased knowledge and reported surgeon confidence in understanding and assisting in cleft lip surgery, signifying its usefulness as a training tool for surgeons-in-training. Virtual simulation is a valuable resource for improving understanding and competence of the craniofacial surgeon while serving as an educational resource to other members of the comprehensive cleft care team, patients, and families.

A Prospective Study of Strut versus Miniplate for Fractures of Mandibular Angle.

This prospective randomized clinical trial compared the treatment outcomes of strut plate and Champy miniplate in fixation of mandibular angle fractures. Patients with mandibular angle fracture were consented and enrolled into this study. Exclusion criteria include patients with severely comminuted fractures. The patients were randomly assigned to receive the strut plate or Champy miniplate for angle fracture fixation. Patient demographics, fracture characteristics, operative and postoperative outcomes were collected prospectively. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate the significance of the outcome. A total of 18 patients were included in this study and randomly assigned to receive either the strut plate or Champy miniplate. Out of which five patients were excluded postoperatively due to complex fracture resulting in postoperative maxillomandibular fixation. The final enrollment was 13 patients, N = 6 (strut) and N = 7 (Champy). There was no statistically significant difference in the pretreatment variables. Nine of these patients had other associated facial fractures, including parasymphyseal and subcondylar fractures. Most of the (11) patients had sufficient follow-up after surgery. Both groups exhibited successful clinical unions of the mandibular angle fractures. The complications associated with the mandibular angle were 20% in the strut plate group and 16.7% in the Champy group. One patient in the strut plate group had a parasymphyseal infection, requiring hardware removal. The strut plate demonstrated comparable surgical outcome as the Champy miniplate. It is a safe and effective alternative for management of mandibular angle fracture.