BACKGROUND: Simulation-based training can improve technical and nontechnical skills in surgery. To date, there is no consensus on the principles for design, validation, and implementation of a simulation-based surgical training curriculum. The aim of this study was to define such principles and formulate them into an interoperable framework using international expert consensus based on the Delphi method. METHODS: Literature was reviewed, 4 international experts were queried, and consensus conference of national and international members of surgical societies was held to identify the items for the Delphi survey. Forty-five international experts in surgical education were invited to complete the online survey by ranking each item on a Likert scale from 1 to 5. Consensus was predefined as Cronbach's α ≥0.80. Items that 80% of experts ranked as ≥4 were included in the final framework. RESULTS: Twenty-four international experts with training in general surgery (n = 11), orthopaedic surgery (n = 2), obstetrics and gynecology (n = 3), urology (n = 1), plastic surgery (n = 1), pediatric surgery (n = 1), otolaryngology (n = 1), vascular surgery (n = 1), military (n = 1), and doctorate-level educators (n = 2) completed the iterative online Delphi survey. Consensus among participants was achieved after one round of the survey (Cronbach's α = 0.91). The final framework included predevelopment analysis; cognitive, psychomotor, and team-based training; curriculum validation evaluation and improvement; and maintenance of training. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi methodology allowed for determination of international expert consensus on the principles for design, validation, and implementation of a simulation-based surgical training curriculum. These principles were formulated into a framework that can be used internationally across surgical specialties as a step-by-step guide for the development and validation of future simulation-based training curricula.
BACKGROUND: Simulation-based training can improve technical and nontechnical skills in surgery. To date, there is no consensus on the principles for design, validation, and implementation of a simulation-based surgical training curriculum. The aim of this study was to define such principles and formulate them into an interoperable framework using international expert consensus based on the Delphi method. METHODS: Literature was reviewed, 4 international experts were queried, and consensus conference of national and international members of surgical societies was held to identify the items for the Delphi survey. Forty-five international experts in surgical education were invited to complete the online survey by ranking each item on a Likert scale from 1 to 5. Consensus was predefined as Cronbach's α ≥0.80. Items that 80% of experts ranked as ≥4 were included in the final framework. RESULTS: Twenty-four international experts with training in general surgery (n = 11), orthopaedic surgery (n = 2), obstetrics and gynecology (n = 3), urology (n = 1), plastic surgery (n = 1), pediatric surgery (n = 1), otolaryngology (n = 1), vascular surgery (n = 1), military (n = 1), and doctorate-level educators (n = 2) completed the iterative online Delphi survey. Consensus among participants was achieved after one round of the survey (Cronbach's α = 0.91). The final framework included predevelopment analysis; cognitive, psychomotor, and team-based training; curriculum validation evaluation and improvement; and maintenance of training. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi methodology allowed for determination of international expert consensus on the principles for design, validation, and implementation of a simulation-based surgical training curriculum. These principles were formulated into a framework that can be used internationally across surgical specialties as a step-by-step guide for the development and validation of future simulation-based training curricula.
Authors: Eliane M Shore; Guylaine G Lefebvre; Heinrich Husslein; Flemming Bjerrum; Jette Led Sorensen; Teodor P Grantcharov Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2015-06
Authors: Mona W Schmidt; Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski; Sarah M Trent; Laura Benner; Beat P Müller-Stich; Felix Nickel Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-05-28 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Amin Madani; Yusuke Watanabe; Melina C Vassiliou; Pascal Fuchshuber; Daniel B Jones; Steven D Schwaitzberg; Gerald M Fried; Liane S Feldman Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-07-03 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Ohad Ronen; K Thomas Robbins; Remco de Bree; Orlando Guntinas-Lichius; Dana M Hartl; Akihiro Homma; Avi Khafif; Luiz P Kowalski; Fernando López; Antti A Mäkitie; Wai Tong Ng; Alessandra Rinaldo; Juan P Rodrigo; Alvaro Sanabria; Alfio Ferlito Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2021-05-12 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Richard A Harbison; Kaalan E Johnson; Craig Miller; Maya G Sardesai; Greg E Davis Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2016-11-16 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Anna H de Vries; Barbara M A Schout; Jeroen J G van Merriënboer; Rob C M Pelger; Evert L Koldewijn; Arno M M Muijtjens; Cordula Wagner Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-07-07 Impact factor: 4.584