Telementoring versus face-to-face mentoring in the training of scleral fixation surgery of intraocular lenses

Luiz Filipe Adami Lucatto; Juliana Moura Bastos Prazeres; Gabriel Castilho Sandoval Barbosa; Eduardo Amorim Novais; Ricardo Luz Leitão Guerra; Emmerson Badaró; Luiz Henrique Soares Gonçalves de Lima; Eduardo Buchele Rodrigues

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0290040

Telementoring versus face-to-face mentoring in the training of scleral fixation surgery of intraocular lenses

PLoS One. 2023 Dec 28;18(12):e0290040. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290040. eCollection 2023.

Authors

Luiz Filipe Adami Lucatto¹, Juliana Moura Bastos Prazeres¹, Gabriel Castilho Sandoval Barbosa², Eduardo Amorim Novais^{1

3}, Ricardo Luz Leitão Guerra⁴, Emmerson Badaró¹, Luiz Henrique Soares Gonçalves de Lima¹, Eduardo Buchele Rodrigues¹

Affiliations

¹ Ophthalmology Department, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
² Suel Abujamra Institute, Ophthalmology Department, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
³ Department of Ophthalmology, Centro Oftalmológico Città, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
⁴ Department of Ophthalmology, Leitão Guerra-Oftalmologia, Salvador, Brazil.

Abstract

Purpose: To assess telementoring as a complementary tool for surgical training of a scleral fixation technique.

Design: Randomized, controlled, two-arm, blinded clinical trial.

Methods: Using a 3D visualization system, 132 participants were randomized in order of enrollment into traditional face-to-face mentoring (n = 66) and telementoring (n = 66). A single surgeon mentored all participants in the 2 groups. The procedure was performed in a model suitable for training in intraocular lens fixation SimulEYE® (INSEYET, WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA, USA). In the telementoring group, the images captured on a local computer were sent to a second computer located in another room through a teleconferencing platform in real-time. Nine steps of the recorded procedure were evaluated and scored by two masked independent surgeons experienced in the technique.

Main outcomes measures: The primary outcomes evaluated were the global score (the sum of each score on the rubric), surgical failure, and surgical time (in seconds).

Results: Surgical success was achieved in 98.5% in the face-to-face group and in 95.5% in the telementoring group (p-value = 0.619). Minimal technical problems were reported in 8 procedures in the telementoring group (12%), without interfering with the surgical result, and completion of the procedure.

Conclusions: Telementoring is an encouraging educational tool that can overcome geographical barriers to ease the transfer of abilities and knowledge. We lack evidence in terms of group differences for superiority comparing face-to-face and telementoring, in addition to presenting comparable results regarding surgical success and failure. More studies are needed to explore the impact of telementoring in other ophthalmological surgeries.

Trial registration: The Federal University of São Paulo institution's Research Ethics Committee reviewed and approved this study protocol (approval number, 5.383.484).

Copyright: © 2023 Lucatto et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Publication types

Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

Humans
Lenses, Intraocular*
Mentoring* / methods
Mentors
Surgeons* / education
Telemedicine* / methods

Grants and funding

This study received a grant for Research from Alcon®. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.