Literature DB >> 24290789

Utility of modern arthroscopic simulator training models.

Rachel M Frank1, Brandon Erickson2, Jonathan M Frank2, Charles A Bush-Joseph2, Bernard R Bach2, Brian J Cole2, Anthony A Romeo2, Matthew T Provencher3, Nikhil N Verma2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to review the published literature on modern arthroscopic simulator training models to (1) determine the ability to transfer skills learned on the model to the operating room and (2) determine the learning curve required to translate such skills.
METHODS: A systematic review of all studies using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines was performed. Two independent reviewers then analyzed studies deemed appropriate for inclusion. Study data collected included participant demographic characteristics, simulator model, type and number of tasks, method of analysis, and results of training, when available. Given the different methods used in each study, descriptive analysis was performed.
RESULTS: Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria (9 shoulder, 9 knee, and 1 hip). A total of 465 participants with a mean age of 30 years were evaluated. Twelve studies (63%) compared task performance among participants of different experience levels, with 100% reporting a positive correlation between experience level and simulator performance. Eight studies (42%) evaluated task performance before and after simulator training, with 6 studies showing improvement after training; 1 study noted no difference in performance after 1 hour of training. One study commented on improved operating room performance after simulator training. No studies commented on the number of training sessions needed to translate skills learned on the models to the operating room.
CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that practice on arthroscopic simulators improves performance on arthroscopic simulators. We cannot, however, definitively comment on whether simulator training correlates to an improved skill set in the operating room. Further work is needed to determine the type and number of training sessions needed to translate arthroscopic skills learned on the models to the operating room. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of studies with Level I through IV evidence.
Copyright © 2014 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24290789     DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2013.09.084

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthroscopy        ISSN: 0749-8063            Impact factor:   4.772


  20 in total

1.  CORR curriculum - orthopaedic education: Faculty development begins at home.

Authors:  Paul J Dougherty
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-10-09       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Validation of a virtual reality-based simulator for shoulder arthroscopy.

Authors:  Stefan Rahm; Marco Germann; Andreas Hingsammer; Karl Wieser; Christian Gerber
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  How to Interpret Metal Ions in THA.

Authors:  Michael J Taunton
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2020-01-23       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study of Educational Techniques in Teaching Basic Arthroscopic Skills in a Low-income Country.

Authors:  Abhiram R Bhashyam; Catherine Logan; Heather J Roberts; Rameez A Qudsi; Jacky Fils; George S M Dyer
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2017-03

5.  [Bootcamp: longitudinal gender-based surgical and clinical skills training].

Authors:  G Gradl; A Bühren; M Simon; B Derntl; H-C Pape; M Knobe
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.000

6.  Surgical skills simulation in trauma and orthopaedic training.

Authors:  Euan R B Stirling; Thomas L Lewis; Nicholas A Ferran
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2014-12-19       Impact factor: 2.359

7.  Performance of medical students on a virtual reality simulator for knee arthroscopy: an analysis of learning curves and predictors of performance.

Authors:  Stefan Rahm; Karl Wieser; Ilhui Wicki; Livia Holenstein; Sandro F Fucentese; Christian Gerber
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2016-03-25       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  In vivo biomechanical measurement and haptic simulation of portal placement procedure in shoulder arthroscopic surgery.

Authors:  Sanghoon Chae; Sung-Weon Jung; Hyung-Soon Park
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  Surgical simulation training in orthopedics: current insights.

Authors:  Portia Kalun; Natalie Wagner; James Yan; Markku T Nousiainen; Ranil R Sonnadara
Journal:  Adv Med Educ Pract       Date:  2018-02-21

10.  Novice Surgeon Portal Preference to Visualize the Femoral Anterior Cruciate Ligament Footprint: The Accessory Medial Portal Offers Improved Visualization.

Authors:  Mehmet Burtaç Eren; Erkal Bilgiç
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-05-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.