Lisa Jagan1, William Turk2, Christian Petropolis3, Rylan Egan4, Nicholas Cofie4, Kenneth W Wright5, Yi Ning J Strube6. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Queen's University and Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, Ontario. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba. 3. Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba. 4. Office of Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Health Science, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario. 5. Wright Foundation for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, Los Angeles, California; Keck School of Medicine at University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 6. Department of Ophthalmology, Queen's University and Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, Ontario. Electronic address: yining.strube@queensu.ca.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To demonstrate the validity of a new 3D-printed silicone model for practicing strabismus surgery, compared with the rabbit head, in terms of simulator fidelity. METHODS: In this multicenter study, a validated questionnaire was developed to assess fidelity of the model and rabbit head. Participants were asked to rate overall globe, conjunctiva, muscle, and scleral fidelity using a 5-point scale. The survey instrument was disseminated at three strabismus instruction courses: at two meetings, participants practiced on the model and rabbit head prior to completing the questionnaire; at the third, instructors demonstrated advanced surgical skills using only the model and then completed the questionnaire. Repeated measures analysis of variance compared ratings. Pearson's or Spearman's correlation evaluated correlation between years of experience to participants' responses. Qualitative data were coded into themes. RESULTS: A total of 47 participants completed the questionnaire. The model rated 18% higher than rabbit head for anatomical accuracy (mean difference, 0.667; P = 0.001) and 25% higher for position of eyes within the head (mean difference, 0.867; P = 0.006). More experienced participants were more likely to strongly agree that the silicone conjunctiva effectively mimics real conjunctiva (ρ = 0.337; P = 0.036) and that scleral tissue effectively mimics real sclera (ρ = 0.298, P = 0.042). Qualitative data supported the model. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the validity of the surgical model in terms of fidelity compared to the rabbit head.
PURPOSE: To demonstrate the validity of a new 3D-printed silicone model for practicing strabismus surgery, compared with the rabbit head, in terms of simulator fidelity. METHODS: In this multicenter study, a validated questionnaire was developed to assess fidelity of the model and rabbit head. Participants were asked to rate overall globe, conjunctiva, muscle, and scleral fidelity using a 5-point scale. The survey instrument was disseminated at three strabismus instruction courses: at two meetings, participants practiced on the model and rabbit head prior to completing the questionnaire; at the third, instructors demonstrated advanced surgical skills using only the model and then completed the questionnaire. Repeated measures analysis of variance compared ratings. Pearson's or Spearman's correlation evaluated correlation between years of experience to participants' responses. Qualitative data were coded into themes. RESULTS: A total of 47 participants completed the questionnaire. The model rated 18% higher than rabbit head for anatomical accuracy (mean difference, 0.667; P = 0.001) and 25% higher for position of eyes within the head (mean difference, 0.867; P = 0.006). More experienced participants were more likely to strongly agree that the silicone conjunctiva effectively mimics real conjunctiva (ρ = 0.337; P = 0.036) and that scleral tissue effectively mimics real sclera (ρ = 0.298, P = 0.042). Qualitative data supported the model. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the validity of the surgical model in terms of fidelity compared to the rabbit head.