METHODS: Through the review of the literature, this paper discusses seven questions, (i) What is SLE? (ii) What are the types of SLEs? (iii) How is SLE classified? (iv) What is HF SLE? (v) What types of SLEs are available in audiology and their level of fidelity? (vi) What are the components needed for developing HF SLE? (vii) What are the possible types of HF SLEs that are suitable for audiology training? Publications were identified by structured searches from three major databases PubMed, Web of Knowledge and PsychInfo and from the reference lists of relevant articles. The authors discussed and mapped the levels of fidelity of SLE audiology training modules from the literature and the learning domains involved in the clinical audiology courses.
RESULTS: The discussion paper has highlighted that most of the existing SLE audiology training modules consist of either low- or medium-fidelity types of simulators. Those components needed to achieve a HF SLE for audiology training are also highlighted.
CONCLUSION: Overall, this review recommends that the combined approach of different levels and types of SLE could be used to obtain a HF SLE training module in audiology training.
METHODS: This validated questionnaire-based study was conducted over 1-month during which Ngenuity 3D surgery was demonstrated. All surgeons and trainees exposed were recruited to complete a questionnaire comprising visualization, physical, ease of use, teaching and learning, and overall satisfaction.
RESULTS: All 7 surgeons and 33 postgraduate students responded. Surgeons reported no significant difference except overall (P = 0.047, paired t-test). Postgraduate trainees reported significantly better experience with 3D for illumination (P = 0.008), manoeuvrability (P = 0.01), glare (P = 0.037), eye strain (P = 0.008), neck and upper back strain (P = 0.000), lower back pain (P = 0.019), communication (P = 0.002), comfortable environment (P = 0.001), sharing of knowledge (P = 0.000), and overall (P = 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: During early experience, surgeons and trainees reported better satisfaction with 3D overall. Trainees had better satisfaction with 3D in various subcomponents of visualization, physical, ease of use, and education.