Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-nf276 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-22T10:17:20.362Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of a temporal bone prototype by experts in otology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 June 2014

M Chenebaux ,
E Lescanne ,
A Robier ,
S Kim  and
D Bakhos
M Chenebaux
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Neck Surgery, University Hospital of Tours, Tours, France
E Lescanne
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Neck Surgery, University Hospital of Tours, Tours, France Faculty of Medicine, University François Rabelais, Tours, France
A Robier
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Neck Surgery, University Hospital of Tours, Tours, France Faculty of Medicine, University François Rabelais, Tours, France
S Kim
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Neck Surgery, University Hospital of Tours, Tours, France
D Bakhos*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Neck Surgery, University Hospital of Tours, Tours, France Faculty of Medicine, University François Rabelais, Tours, France
*
Address for correspondence: Dr David Bakhos, Department of Otolaryngology and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University François Rabelais, 2, Boulevard Tonnellé, 37000 Tours, France Fax: 0033 0247473600 E-mail: david.bakhos@univ-tours.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

Inexperienced otologists require training on the temporal bone drilling process, prior to any surgical activity. The shortage of cadaveric temporal bones exerts pressure to create realistic physical prototypes. This paper describes the evaluation by otology experts of a specially developed temporal bone resin model.

Methods:

Computed tomography images were transformed into digital files, and anatomically identical right temporal bone models were created using stereolithography. These hand-painted resin prototypes were sent to 25 otologists, accompanied by a 20-item questionnaire.

Results:

Satisfaction rate was 92 per cent. The overall prototype score was 48.87 out of 60. Average scores were: 12.63 out of 15 for anatomy-morphology, 6.98 out of 9 for quality of drilling, 16.74 out of 21 for identification of anatomical elements and 7.41 out of 9 for stages of drilling. Limitations of the model included an excessively vivid facial nerve colour and difficulty in identifying the posterior semicircular canal. Disadvantages related to the thickness of the resin and its residues were identified.

Conclusion:

The prototype appears to provide an attractive solution to the shortage of cadaveric temporal bones. However, interest in the model for drilling technique training for inexperienced otologists has not yet been assessed.

Keywords

Temporal BoneTrainingSurgeryEvaluationOtology

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 128 , Issue 7 , July 2014 , pp. 586 - 590
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1Martling, AL, Holm, T, Rutqvist, LE, Moran, BJ, Heald, RJ, Cedemark, B. Effect of a surgical training program on outcome of rectal cancer in the County of Stockholm. Stockholm Colorectal Cancer Study Group, Basingstoke Bowel Cancer Research Project. Lancet 2000;356:93–6Google Scholar
2Levenson, MJ. Methods of teaching stapedectomy. Laryngoscope 1999;109:1731–9Google Scholar
3Roberts, KE, Bell, RL, Duffy, AJ. Evolution of surgical skills training. World J Gastroenterol 2006;12:3219–24CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4McLachlan, AD, Bligh, J, Bradley, P, Searle, J. Teaching anatomy without cadavers. Med Educ 2004;38:418–24CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Beard, JD, Jolly, BC, Newble, DI, Thomas, WE, Donnelly, J, Southgate, LJ. Assessing the technical skills of surgical trainees. Br J Surg 2005;92:778–82Google Scholar
6Bakhos, D, Velut, S, Robier, A, Al Zahrani, M, Lescanne, E. Three-dimensional modeling of the temporal bone for surgical training. Neurotol Otol 2010;31:328–34Google Scholar
7Paiva, WS, Amorim, R, Bezerra, DA, Masini, M. Application of the stereolithography technique in complex spine surgery. Neuropsiquiatr Arq 2007;65:443–5Google Scholar
8Lambrecht, JT, Berndt, D, Christensen, AM, Zehnder, M. Haptic model fabrication for undergraduate and postgraduate teaching. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;39:1226–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9Uhlig, CE, Gerding, H. A dummy orbit for training in diagnostic procedures and laser surgery with enucleated eyes. Am J Ophthalmol 1998;126:464–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Wang, H, Merchant, SN, Sorensen, MS. A downloadable three-dimensional virtual model of the visible ear. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2007;69:63–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Sorensens, MS, Dobrezeniecki, AB, Larsen, P, Frisch, T, Sporring, J, Darvann, TA. The visible ear: a digital image library of the temporal bone. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2002;64:378–81Google Scholar
12Fried, MP, Uribe, JI, Sadoughi, B. The role of virtual reality in surgical training in otorhinolaryngology. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2007;15:163–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Neri, E, Sellari Franceschini, S, Berrettini, S, Caramella, D, Bartolozzi, C. IERAPSI project: simulation of a canal wall-up mastoidectomy. Comput Aided Surg 2006;11:99–102CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Wiet, GJ, Schmalbrock, P, Powell, K, Stredney, D. Use of ultra-high-resolution data for temporal bone dissection simulation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005;133:911–15CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Zirkle, M, Roberson, DW, Leuwer, R, Dubrowski, A. Using a virtual reality temporal bone simulator to assess otolaryngology trainees. Laryngoscope 2007;117:258–63Google Scholar
16Wiet, GJ, Stredney, D, Sessanna, D, Bryan, JA, Welling, DB, Schmalbrock, P. Virtual temporal bone dissection: an interactive surgical simulator. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;127:79–83Google Scholar
17Kakizawa, Y, Hongo, K, Rhoton, AL Jr.Construction of a three-dimensional interactive model of the skull base and cranial nerves. Neurosurgery 2007;60:901–10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18Mason, TP, Applebaum, EL, Rasmussen, M, Millman, A, Evenhouse, R, Panko, W. Virtual temporal bone: creation and implementation of a new computer-based teaching tool. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;122:168–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19Uhl, JF, Plaisant, O, Ami, O, Delmas, V. 3D modeling in the field of morphology: methods, interest and results [in French]. Morphologie 2006;90:5–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20Pettigrew Temporal Bones. In: www.temporal-bone.com [20 May 2014]Google Scholar
21Mills, R, Lee, P. Surgical skills training in middle-ear surgery. J Laryngol Otol 2003;117:159–63Google Scholar
22Mori, K, Yamamoto, T, Oyama, K, Ueno, H, Nakao, Y, Honma, K. Modified three-dimensional skull base model with artificial dura mater, cranial nerves, venous sinuses and skull base for training in surgery: technical note. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2008;48:582–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23Suzuki, M, Ogawa, Y, Kawano, A, Hagiwara, A, Yamaguchi, H, Ono, H. Rapid prototyping of temporal bone for surgical training and medical education. Acta Otolaryngol 2004;124:400–2Google Scholar
24Venail, F, Deveze, A, Lallemant, B, Guevara, N, Mondain, M. Enhancement of temporal bone anatomy learning with computer 3D rendered imaging software. Med Teach 2010;32:e282–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25Lawrence, RH, Tomolo, AM. Development and preliminary evaluation of a practice-based learning and improvement tool for assessing resident competence and guiding curriculum development. J Grad Med Educ 2011;3:41–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26Nadeau, MT, Tysinger, JW. The annual program review of effectiveness: a process improvement approach. Fam Med 2012;44:32–8Google ScholarPubMed