INTRODUCTION: Virtual reality arthroscopic simulators are becoming increasingly prevalent in the orthopaedic training environment. The construct validity of the ArthroSim virtual reality simulator (TolTech Touch of Life Technologies, Aurora, Colorado) has been established based on time to completion comparison between candidates of differing levels of surgical experience. This study aims to establish the construct validity of the ArthroSim virtual reality simulator using validated global rating scales that allow direct comparison with intraoperative performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight novices (medical students), eight intermediates (registrars), and seven experts (consultants) were assessed using the Imperial Global Arthroscopy Rating Scale (IGARS) and the Arthroscopic Surgical Skills Evaluation Tool (ASSET) scoring systems while carrying out a standardised basic diagnostic knee arthroscopy using linked and anonymised recordings of both the arthroscopy video output and candidate's hand posture and position. Time to completion was recorded and the expert group also filled out questionnaires assessing the face and content validity of the simulator. RESULTS: The mean IGARS/ASSET scores for the novice, intermediate and expert groups were 14/11, 29/22, and 46/36 respectively. The difference in score between each of the groups was statistically significant (p<0.05). The average time to completion was 257 seconds, 305 seconds, and 204 seconds respectively. The time to completion was not significantly different between the groups (p=0.6). CONCLUSIONS: The ArthroSim virtual reality simulator could effectively distinguish between candidates of differing experience levels using validated global rating scales and therefore demonstrated construct validity.
INTRODUCTION: Virtual reality arthroscopic simulators are becoming increasingly prevalent in the orthopaedic training environment. The construct validity of the ArthroSim virtual reality simulator (TolTech Touch of Life Technologies, Aurora, Colorado) has been established based on time to completion comparison between candidates of differing levels of surgical experience. This study aims to establish the construct validity of the ArthroSim virtual reality simulator using validated global rating scales that allow direct comparison with intraoperative performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight novices (medical students), eight intermediates (registrars), and seven experts (consultants) were assessed using the Imperial Global Arthroscopy Rating Scale (IGARS) and the Arthroscopic Surgical Skills Evaluation Tool (ASSET) scoring systems while carrying out a standardised basic diagnostic knee arthroscopy using linked and anonymised recordings of both the arthroscopy video output and candidate's hand posture and position. Time to completion was recorded and the expert group also filled out questionnaires assessing the face and content validity of the simulator. RESULTS: The mean IGARS/ASSET scores for the novice, intermediate and expert groups were 14/11, 29/22, and 46/36 respectively. The difference in score between each of the groups was statistically significant (p<0.05). The average time to completion was 257 seconds, 305 seconds, and 204 seconds respectively. The time to completion was not significantly different between the groups (p=0.6). CONCLUSIONS: The ArthroSim virtual reality simulator could effectively distinguish between candidates of differing experience levels using validated global rating scales and therefore demonstrated construct validity.