Primary and secondary outcomes.
temporary interruptions
SECONDARY, COMPLICATION
The global score (seven items summed score) ranged from 0 to 21.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). Only one participant from the face-to-face group had the procedure classified as “surgical failure” because of IOL damage during the Akreos® implantation. In the Telementoring group, two participants had surgical failure related to the same complication, and another participant due to a technical problem in the transmission of the images at the end of the mentorship.Regarding secondary outcomes (mentoring satisfaction) where four items were evaluated, we observe that two of them were shown to be significantly positive and in favor of a face-to-face approach: communication and the SimulEye® model used for training, with effect sizes between small and medium (i.e., 0.2 to 0.5, standardized Cohen’s d effect size).Minimal technical problems were reported in 8 procedures in the telementoring group (12%), without interfering with the surgical result, and completion of the procedure. Six participants reported temporary interruptions in communication, and one complained of delay. Another participant reported a problem with the 3D NGENUITY® system and that the 3D visualization was not activated during mentoring.Lastly, as an exploratory analysis, we tested the effects of whether the primary outcomes might change depending on the time of experience since residency. We noted a significant interaction effect between the randomization assignment and time since the residency (p-value = 0.0457). Participants with more than 13 years since the residency within the telementoring group showed lower scores on the skill scale than those allocated in the face-to-face group. See 