The Use of 3D Printing as an Educational Tool in Orthopaedics
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Three-dimensional (3D) printing has proven to be effective in orthopaedic surgery, improving both surgical planning and outcomes. Despite its increasing use in surgical programs, reviews evaluating its educational impact are sparse. Therefore, the aim of this review was to provide educators with evidence-based findings on 3D printing's potential in training junior surgeons, as well as discuss its benefits in enhancing patient communication. Methods: A comprehensive search using PubMed and Web of Science databases was performed to identify articles related to orthopaedics, 3D printing, and education. After removing duplicates, 2,160 articles were screened, 152 underwent full-text review, and 50 met inclusion criteria. Articles discussed the impact of 3D-printed models on comprehension or surgical performance. Data on publication details, sample size, teaching focus, learning outcomes, costs, and conclusions were extracted. Learning effects in the control (didactic) and experimental (3DP) groups were compared. Results: In fracture management training, studies demonstrated significantly improved fracture classification accuracy, surgical performance, and interobserver classification agreement with 3D models compared with didactic learning and traditional imaging modalities. These benefits were particularly evident in cases of complex fractures and junior trainees. In arthroscopy, 3D-printed simulators improved procedural accuracy and were more cost-effective than virtual reality simulators and cadaveric laboratory results. Three-dimensionally printed simulators were also assessed for skills related to spine surgery, in which trainees demonstrated clear learning curve improvements for pedicle screw placement and osteotomy techniques, as well as a better understanding of vital paraspinal structures. The application of 3D printing in patient education was equally promising, as it facilitated the process of informed consent, ultimately promoting shared decision making. Conclusion: The use of 3D-printed models offers effective and customizable methods for developing essential surgical skills. Future research should focus on larger, more diverse study populations and should include long-term follow-up to better assess the impact of 3D printing on education and patient outcomes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle