Table 2 Evaluation of laparoscopic skill and GVS performance (PPT), comparing inexperienced and experienced students.

From: Impact of laparoscopic training, haptic feedback and visual haptic latency on virtual fine motor performance

Items

Inexperienced (n = 28) mean (SD)

Experienced (n = 29) mean (SD)

p value

Purdue Pegboard Test

Right hand

15.1 (1.8)

15.5 (1.5)

0.12

Left hand

14.2 (1.6)

14.4 (1.5)

0.60

Both hands

12.6 (1.6)

12.97 (1.2)

0.22

Assembly

40.3 (5.9)

40 (6.2)

0.95

Peg transfer

Errors

1.2 (1.3)

0.3 (0.6)

 < 0.01

Task completion time

231.3 (67.5)

135.4 (33.0)

 < 0.01

Total path length

12,977.1 (3,658.6)

8,457.7 (1689.6)

 < 0.01

  1. Comparison between the group of inexperienced and experienced medical students in terms of basic participant characteristics and their performance in GVS tasks such as the PPT and the Peg transfer task. Groups were compared using an unpaired Student’s t-test. Significant p values are highlighted in bold.
Back to article page