{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01844532279314888, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.751111111111111, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Suitability of the ovine model for simulation training in rhinology

INTRODUCTION The acquisition of high-quality endoscopic skills in rhinology presents a specific challenge to trainees in otolaryngology. In particular, developing hand-eye coordination and depth perception using endoscopic instruments takes time. These issues are compounded by the complex nature of sinonasal anatomy, the proximity of vital neurovascular structures, and governmental restrictions on working hours. As a consequence, simulation training has gained popularity as it offers the potential for practice in a safe, controlled environment outside of working hours. Various sinonasal training models have been developed and trialed. The human cadaver self-evidently offers the greatest anatomical realism, but it is expensive and preservation techniques can alter tissue appearance and handling. Synthetic and virtual models vary significantly in cost, but they are unable to reproduce the subtleties of real tissues. Animal models represent the principle alternative as they offer advantages of low cost and realistic tissue handling. Both ovine and lamb’s head models have been successfully utilized. However, there exists the obvious drawback of differing anatomy. Therefore, our study sought to evaluate the suitability of the ovine model for use in an otolaryngological training program, in particular, considering comparative ovine anatomy, cost, and the potential for gaining transferrable skills complementary to clinical training.