Ann E Van Heest1, Julie Agel1, S Elizabeth Ames2, Ferhan A Asghar3, John J Harrast4, J Lawrence Marsh5, Joshua C Patt6, Robert S Sterling7, Terrance D Peabody8. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 2. Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio. 4. Data Harbor Solutions, Chicago, Illinois. 5. Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 6. CMC Orthopaedic Surgery, Carolinas HealthCare System, Charlotte, North Carolina. 7. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland. 8. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evaluation of surgical skill competency is necessary as graduate medical education moves toward a competency-based curriculum. This study by the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) and the Council of Orthopaedic Residency Directors (CORD) compares 2 web-based evaluation tools that assess the level of autonomy that is demonstrated by residents during surgical procedures in the operating room as measured by faculty. METHODS:Two hundred and ninety-four residents from 16 orthopaedic surgery residency programs were evaluated by 370 faculty using 2 web-based evaluation tools in a crossover design in which residents requested faculty review of their surgical skills before starting a case. One thousand, one hundred and fifty Ottawa Surgical Competency Operating Room Evaluation (O-Score) assessments, which included a 9-question evaluation of 8 steps of the surgical procedure, were compared with 1,186 P-score evaluations, which included a single-question summative evaluation. Twenty-five different surgical procedures were evaluated. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in rates of resident requests or faculty completion of the 2 scores. The most common surgical procedures that were assessed were total knee arthroplasty (n = 254, 11%), carpal tunnel release (n = 191, 8%), open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of stable hip fractures (n = 170, 7%), ORIF of simple ankle fractures (n = 169, 7%), and total hip arthroplasty (n = 166, 7%). Both instruments disclosed significant differences in competency among entry, intermediate, and advanced-level residents. The findings support the construct validity of the evaluation method. The survey results indicated that >70% of the faculty were confident that use of either the P-score or the O-score allowed them to distinguish a resident who can perform the surgery independently from one who needs additional training. CONCLUSIONS: This research has led to the modification of the O-score and the P-score into a combined OP-score instrument. The ABOS envisions that the OP-score instrument can be used with an expanded number of surgical procedures as a required element of residency training in the near future. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study allows the profession of orthopaedic surgery education to take a leadership role in the measurement of competence for surgical skills for orthopaedic surgeons in residency training, an important clinically relevant topic to the practice of orthopaedic surgery.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Evaluation of surgical skill competency is necessary as graduate medical education moves toward a competency-based curriculum. This study by the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) and the Council of Orthopaedic Residency Directors (CORD) compares 2 web-based evaluation tools that assess the level of autonomy that is demonstrated by residents during surgical procedures in the operating room as measured by faculty. METHODS: Two hundred and ninety-four residents from 16 orthopaedic surgery residency programs were evaluated by 370 faculty using 2 web-based evaluation tools in a crossover design in which residents requested faculty review of their surgical skills before starting a case. One thousand, one hundred and fifty Ottawa Surgical Competency Operating Room Evaluation (O-Score) assessments, which included a 9-question evaluation of 8 steps of the surgical procedure, were compared with 1,186 P-score evaluations, which included a single-question summative evaluation. Twenty-five different surgical procedures were evaluated. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in rates of resident requests or faculty completion of the 2 scores. The most common surgical procedures that were assessed were total knee arthroplasty (n = 254, 11%), carpal tunnel release (n = 191, 8%), open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of stable hip fractures (n = 170, 7%), ORIF of simple ankle fractures (n = 169, 7%), and total hip arthroplasty (n = 166, 7%). Both instruments disclosed significant differences in competency among entry, intermediate, and advanced-level residents. The findings support the construct validity of the evaluation method. The survey results indicated that >70% of the faculty were confident that use of either the P-score or the O-score allowed them to distinguish a resident who can perform the surgery independently from one who needs additional training. CONCLUSIONS: This research has led to the modification of the O-score and the P-score into a combined OP-score instrument. The ABOS envisions that the OP-score instrument can be used with an expanded number of surgical procedures as a required element of residency training in the near future. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study allows the profession of orthopaedic surgery education to take a leadership role in the measurement of competence for surgical skills for orthopaedic surgeons in residency training, an important clinically relevant topic to the practice of orthopaedic surgery.
Authors: April D Armstrong; Julie Agel; Matthew D Beal; Michael S Bednar; Michelle S Caird; James E Carpenter; Stuart T Guthrie; Paul Juliano; Matthew Karam; Dawn LaPorte; J Lawrence Marsh; Joshua C Patt; Terrance D Peabody; Karen Wu; David F Martin; John J Harrast; Ann E Van Heest Journal: JB JS Open Access Date: 2020-11-23
Authors: Ann E Van Heest; April D Armstrong; Michael S Bednar; James E Carpenter; Kevin L Garvin; John J Harrast; David F Martin; Peter M Murray; Terrance D Peabody; Charles L Saltzman; Mona Saniei; Lisa A Taitsman; J Lawrence Marsh Journal: JB JS Open Access Date: 2022-05-19
Authors: Steven Long; Geb W Thomas; Matthew D Karam; J Lawrence Marsh; Donald D Anderson Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 4.755