| Literature DB >> 29202838 |
Gregory Tanner1, Saman Vojdani2, David E Komatsu1, James M Barsi1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine if a Sawbones Scoliosis Model could be used as a simulator to train residents in placing pedicle screws-a complex procedure with a steep learning curve. Surgical simulation, a common tool teaching residents complex procedures in a safe environment, was staged using a Sawbones Scoliosis Model. Ten junior and ten senior residents out of 25 total possible residents (80%) were instructed how to place pedicle screws using the free-hand technique. They were then asked to place them unilaterally from T4 to L4 and were assessed on completion time, accuracy placement accuracy, and overall competency using an objective rating scale.Entities:
Keywords: Pedicle screw; Saw bones; Scoliosis; Surgical simulation
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29202838 PMCID: PMC5715714 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-017-3029-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Objective rating scale
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preparation | Did not organize, has to stop procedure frequently to prepare equipment | Equipment generally organized | All equipment neatly prepared and ready for use | ||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| Time and motion | Many unnecessary movements | Efficient time and motion | Clear economy of movement and maximum efficiency | ||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| Instrument handling | Repeatedly makes tentative or awkward moves with instruments | Competent use of instruments, occasionally appeared stiff and awkward | Fluid moves with instruments and no awkwardness | ||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| Flow of procedure | Frequently stopped procedure and seemed unsure of next moves | Demonstrated some forward planning with reasonable progression of procedure | Obviously planned course of procedure with effortless flow from one move to the next | ||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| Knowledge of procedure | Deficient knowledge | Knew all important steps | Demonstrated familiarity with all aspects of the procedure | ||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| Overall performance | Very poor | Competent | Clearly superior |
Grading rubric for steps and global rating scale for resident performance
Fig. 1a Completion time in minutes for junior and senior residents. b Screw accuracy for junior and senior residents. Graphic illustrating comparative group findings
Scores on objective global exam
| Junior residents | Senior residents | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preparation | 3.29 ± 0.49 | 3.43 ± 0.53 | 0.591 |
| Time and motion | 2.71 ± 0.49 | 3.71 ± 0.95 |
|
| Instrument handling | 2.86 ± 0.90 | 3.14 ± 0.69 | 0.496 |
| Flow | 3.29 ± 0.49 | 3.57 ± 0.53 | 0.298 |
| Knowledge | 3.29 ± 0.49 | 3.71 ± 0.76 | 0.244 |
| Overall | 3.29 ± 0.49 | 3.57 ± 0.53 | 0.298 |
Compiled scores for residents based on rubric. This table presents the mean ± standard deviation for each of the five evaluated surgical skills demonstrated by the junior and senior residents. p values obtained from Mann–Whitney tests comparing the groups are presented in the last column with significant values (i.e., p > 0.05) highlighted in italics