PubMed · 8510882
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
T Aronowitz, S Allen. Problem solution. Matching a solution with the correct problem.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8510882/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Medicine with its abundance of facts and richness of imaging techniques has always been adopting new technologies to improve teaching and training. As a natural consequence, the use of computer-based multimedia technology is generally increasing in medicine and also reaching the field of neurosurgery. Especially the use of interactive multimedia technology seems promising to improve training and education and increase accessibility of highly specific material.
OBJECTIVE: To describe our initial experience with a computerized telecommunication system, termed the interactive voice-response system, to record resident performance of laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: After completing a laparoscopic procedure, the surgeon and resident telephone a toll-free number independently and respond to three prerecorded statements using a Likert scale of 1 to 5. The caller then is asked to describe the resident's response to critical incidents or elements of surprise that arose during the surgery. The ratings and verbal comments are compiled, transcribed, and forwarded to the respective resident. The resident (and program director) can hear the verbal comments by entering a four-digit code. RESULTS: Between May 1, 1995, and May 31, 1996, 430 cases were reported by 11 surgeons and 16 residents using the interactive voice-response system. One hundred ninety-five (45%) procedures were entered by both the resident and surgeon. A survey undertaken during the introductory phase of the project revealed that five of the seven residents exposed to the system found that it provided useful feedback and preferred the system to traditional in-service reporting methods. In addition, five residents thought that the system complemented the personal feedback they received in the operating room. CONCLUSION: The system has been accepted by both residents and surgeons and has addressed the important components of resident in-training evaluation, namely, evaluation on a case-by-case basis, timely feedback, and self-assessment of resident performance.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.