PubMed · 11643049
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Stephen M Weissman. 1992. Discussion.. https://doi.org/10.1521/jaap.1.1992.20.4.659
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVE: To present the cinematographic production of Arthur Van Gehuchten (1861-1914) and to put this collection into its medical and sociocultural context. BACKGROUND: The arrival of Edison's Kinetoscope (1891) and Lumière's Cinématographe (1895) provoked the immediate interest of neurologists who foresaw the potential of motion pictures for illustration, research, and teaching. RESULTS: Arthur Van Gehuchten, professor of anatomy and neurology at the Catholic University of Louvain, was trained as a microscopist and a cytologist. From neuroanatomy, he progressively broadened his interest to neurology. Van Gehuchten was an avant-garde teacher, eager to adopt new visual aids. In 1895, he attended the first cinematographic screenings. Medical cinematography was soon brought into disrepute in European academic circles, when films made by the French surgeon Doyen were copied and shown on fairgrounds. Nevertheless, in 1905, Van Gehuchten began to film neurologic patients. He used this technique extensively to demonstrate clinical signs, to illustrate neurologic diseases, and to document functional evolution following surgery. For decades, these films were screened for medical students by Van Gehuchten's successors to the chair of neurology. The original nitrate films (more than 2 hours) have been recently rediscovered. They have been restored by the Royal Belgian Film Archive, where they are the oldest Belgian films. CONCLUSIONS: At the beginning of the 20th century, Van Gehuchten built up a collection of moving pictures for teaching purposes. This was one of the first such undertakings. This unique set of films has miraculously survived, and serves as an important archive of nervous diseases and their manifestations prior to the advent of modern therapies.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic suturing is required to develop competency in advanced laparoscopy. METHODS: Manuals detailing laparoscopic suturing were give to 17 Surgery residents. One week later they performed a suture on a training model. Time (s), accuracy (mm), and knot strength (lb) were recorded. The residents were blindly randomized to intervention (n = 9) and control (n = 8) groups. The intervention residents attended a 60-min course with lecture, video, and individual proctoring. Two weeks later they performed a stitch with standard laparoscopic instruments and a stitch with a suturing assist device. Statistical analysis included a Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: The intervention residents decreased their suturing time from the first to the second stitich (732.4-257.6s), the control and residents decreased their time from 500.2 s to 421.8 s. The time required to perform the second stitch showed no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.46), but the difference in reduced time between the first and second stitch was significant (p = 0.001). Using the suturing assist device for the third suture, the intervention and control groups both decreased their times significantly. The control residents performed almost as quickly as the intervention residents with the suturing; device (p = 0.11). Accuracy and knot strength were not different in any test. CONCLUSIONS: Residents can improve suturing skill with a short didactic course and individual proctoring. A suturing assist device decreases time required by inexperienced surgeons to device perform an intracorporeal tie.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.