BACKGROUND: The "Southwestern" videotrainer stations have demonstrated concurrent validity (transferability to the operating room). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Southwestern stations for construct validity (the ability to discriminate between subjects at different levels of experience). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From two surgical training programs, Institutional Review Board approved protocol data were collected from 142 subjects, including novice (medical students and R1, n = 66), intermediate (R2-R4, n = 67), and advanced (R5 and expert surgeons, n = 9) groups. All participants performed three repetitions on each of five stations. Completion time was scored for each task. Laparoscopic experience was determined from residency case log databases and from expert surgeon personal case logs. Results for the three groups were compared using one-way ANOVA, including relevant pair-wise comparisons. Correlations between number of laparoscopic cases performed and task scores were determined by Pearson's and Spearman's rho-correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The mean number of laparoscopic cases performed prior to completing the five tasks was 0 for novices, 9 for intermediates, and 431 for the advanced group. Significant differences (P < 0.001) were noted between groups for all five tasks and composite score. Task scores and composite scores significantly correlated with laparoscopic experience (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that differences in laparoscopic ability are detected by performance on the videotrainer; thus, construct validity is demonstrated. Moreover, scores accurately reflect laparoscopic experience. Further validation may allow such simulators to be used for testing and credentialing purposes.
BACKGROUND: The "Southwestern" videotrainer stations have demonstrated concurrent validity (transferability to the operating room). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Southwestern stations for construct validity (the ability to discriminate between subjects at different levels of experience). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From two surgical training programs, Institutional Review Board approved protocol data were collected from 142 subjects, including novice (medical students and R1, n = 66), intermediate (R2-R4, n = 67), and advanced (R5 and expert surgeons, n = 9) groups. All participants performed three repetitions on each of five stations. Completion time was scored for each task. Laparoscopic experience was determined from residency case log databases and from expert surgeon personal case logs. Results for the three groups were compared using one-way ANOVA, including relevant pair-wise comparisons. Correlations between number of laparoscopic cases performed and task scores were determined by Pearson's and Spearman's rho-correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The mean number of laparoscopic cases performed prior to completing the five tasks was 0 for novices, 9 for intermediates, and 431 for the advanced group. Significant differences (P < 0.001) were noted between groups for all five tasks and composite score. Task scores and composite scores significantly correlated with laparoscopic experience (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that differences in laparoscopic ability are detected by performance on the videotrainer; thus, construct validity is demonstrated. Moreover, scores accurately reflect laparoscopic experience. Further validation may allow such simulators to be used for testing and credentialing purposes.
Authors: Genevieve Dulan; Robert V Rege; Deborah C Hogg; Kristine M Gilberg-Fisher; Nabeel A Arain; Seifu T Tesfay; Daniel J Scott Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-02-21 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Jonathan D Hendrie; Felix Nickel; Thomas Bruckner; Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski; Carly R Garrow; Maisha Mantel; Philipp Romero; Beat P Müller-Stich Journal: Trials Date: 2016-01-07 Impact factor: 2.279