Literature DB >> 27720405

Construct Validity, Assessment of the Learning Curve, and Experience of Using a Low-Cost Arthroscopic Surgical Simulator.

Henry B Colaco1, Katie Hughes2, Eyiyemi Pearse1, Magnus Arnander1, Duncan Tennent1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We have developed a low-cost, portable shoulder simulator designed to train basic arthroscopic skills. This study aimed to establish the construct validity of the simulator by determining which parameters discriminated between experience levels and to assess the experience of using the simulator.
DESIGN: Participants were given an introductory presentation and an untimed practice run of a 6-step triangulation task using hooks and rubber bands. A total of 6 consecutive attempts at the task were timed, and the number of times the participant looked at their hands during the task was recorded. Participants then completed a questionnaire on their experience of using the simulator.
SETTING: St George's Hospital, London and the South West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Surrey. PARTICIPANTS: Medical students, trainee doctors and surgeons, and consultant surgeons were approached to use the simulator. Participation was voluntary and nonincentivized. In total, 7 orthopedic consultants, 12 trainee doctors (ranging from foundation year 1 to clinical fellow post-Certificate of Completion of Training), and 9 medical students were recruited.
RESULTS: The average time for medical students to complete the task was 161 seconds, compared to 118 seconds for trainees, and 84 seconds for consultants. The average fastest time for medical students was 105 seconds, 73 seconds for trainees, and 52 seconds for consultants. Students were significantly slower than trainees (p = 0.026) and consultants (p = 0.001). However, times did not differ significantly between trainees and consultants. Consultants looked at their hands 0.7 times on average during the task compared with 2.8 and 3.4 times for trainees and students, respectively. More than 95% of participants found the exercise interesting and agreed or strongly agreed that the simulator was easy to use, easily portable, and well designed and constructed. DISCUSSION: This study has established construct validity of the simulator by demonstrating the ability to distinguish between surgical experience levels. The learning curve shows improvement in individuals with or without arthroscopic or surgical experience. Simulation is becoming increasingly important in the training of medical students and surgical trainees; this study has established that low-cost portable arthroscopic box trainers may play a significant role.
Copyright © 2016 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Medical Knowledge; Patient Care; Practice-Based Learning and Improvement; arthroscopy; simulation; surgery; training

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27720405     DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.07.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Surg Educ        ISSN: 1878-7452            Impact factor:   2.891


  10 in total

1.  A novel arthroscopy training program based on a 3D printed simulator.

Authors:  J Ferràs-Tarragó; N Jover-Jorge; I Miranda-Gómez
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2022-05-07

2.  Current provision of simulation in the UK and Republic of Ireland trauma and orthopaedic specialist training: a national survey.

Authors:  Hannah K James; Robert J H Gregory; Duncan Tennent; Giles T R Pattison; Joanne D Fisher; Damian R Griffin
Journal:  Bone Jt Open       Date:  2020-05-13

3.  The FAST Workstation Shows Construct Validity and Participant Endorsement.

Authors:  Jonathan A Baxter; Nivraj S Bhamber; Rakesh S Patel; Duncan Tennent
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-06-18

4.  Repeatability and reproducibility of a telemanipulated fracture reduction system.

Authors:  Eduardo M Suero; Ralf Westphal; Musa Citak; Volker Stueber; Ullrich Lueke; Christian Krettek; Timo Stuebig
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-09-09

5.  Construct Validity of a Virtual Reality Simulator for Surgical Training in Knee Arthroscopy.

Authors:  Miguel J Palet; Marcela Antúnez-Riveros; Maximiliano Barahona
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2021-05-25

6.  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

7.  Comparative Effectiveness of Teaching Obstetrics and Gynaecological Procedural Skills on Patients versus Models: A randomized trial.

Authors:  Shereen Zulfiqar Bhutta; Haleema Yasmin
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2018 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.088

8.  Predictors of Performance on the Arthrobox Arthroscopy Simulator for Medical Students.

Authors:  Bradley P Richey; Matthew Jordan Deal; Alexandra Baker; Eric M Mason; Ibrahim Mamdouh Zeini; Daryl Christopher Osbahr; Benjamin C Service
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2020-10-23

9.  Analysis of Tools Used in Assessing Technical Skills and Operative Competence in Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgical Training: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Hannah K James; Anna W Chapman; Giles T R Pattison; Joanne D Fisher; Damian R Griffin
Journal:  JBJS Rev       Date:  2020-06

10.  Morphological validation of a novel bi-material 3D-printed model of temporal bone for middle ear surgery education.

Authors:  Jordan Chauvelot; Cedric Laurent; Gaël Le Coz; Jean-Philippe Jehl; Nguyen Tran; Marta Szczetynska; Abdelhadi Moufki; Anne-Sophie Bonnet; Cecile Parietti-Winkler
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-03
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.