Jonathan Moore1, Stewart Whalen2, Neal Rowe3, Jason Y Lee4, Michael Ordon4, Andrea G Lantz Powers2. 1. Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, United States. 2. Department of Urology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada. 3. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Ottawa and the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 4. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Simulation-based training is used to help trainees learn surgical procedures in a safe environment. The objective of our study was to test the face, content, and construct validity of the transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) module built on the Simbionix TURP Mentor simulator. METHODS: Participants performed five standardized cases on the simulator. Domains of the simulator were evaluated on a five-point Likert scale to establish face and content validity. Construct validity was assessed through the simulator's built-in scoring metrics, as well as video recordings of the simulator screen and an anonymized view of participants' hands and feet, which were evaluated using an objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) tool. RESULTS: Ten experienced operators and 15 novices participated. Face validity was somewhat acceptable (mean realism 3.8/5±1.03 standard deviation [SD]; mean appearance 4.1/5±0.57), as was content validity, represented by simulation of key steps (mean 3.9±0.57). The simulator failed to achieve construct validity. There was no difference in mean simulator scores or OSATS scoring between experienced operators and novices. Novices significantly improved their mean simulator scores (305.9 vs. 332.4, p=0.006) and OSATS scoring (15.8 vs. 18.1, p=0.001), while 87% felt their confidence to perform TURBT improved. Overall, 92% of participants agreed that the simulator should be incorporated into residency training. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests a role for the TURBT module of the Simbionix TURP Mentor simulator as an introduction to TURBT for urology trainees. Strong support was found from both experienced operators and novices for its formal inclusion in resident education.
INTRODUCTION: Simulation-based training is used to help trainees learn surgical procedures in a safe environment. The objective of our study was to test the face, content, and construct validity of the transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) module built on the Simbionix TURP Mentor simulator. METHODS: Participants performed five standardized cases on the simulator. Domains of the simulator were evaluated on a five-point Likert scale to establish face and content validity. Construct validity was assessed through the simulator's built-in scoring metrics, as well as video recordings of the simulator screen and an anonymized view of participants' hands and feet, which were evaluated using an objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) tool. RESULTS: Ten experienced operators and 15 novices participated. Face validity was somewhat acceptable (mean realism 3.8/5±1.03 standard deviation [SD]; mean appearance 4.1/5±0.57), as was content validity, represented by simulation of key steps (mean 3.9±0.57). The simulator failed to achieve construct validity. There was no difference in mean simulator scores or OSATS scoring between experienced operators and novices. Novices significantly improved their mean simulator scores (305.9 vs. 332.4, p=0.006) and OSATS scoring (15.8 vs. 18.1, p=0.001), while 87% felt their confidence to perform TURBT improved. Overall, 92% of participants agreed that the simulator should be incorporated into residency training. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests a role for the TURBT module of the Simbionix TURP Mentor simulator as an introduction to TURBT for urology trainees. Strong support was found from both experienced operators and novices for its formal inclusion in resident education.
Authors: Anna H de Vries; Hilde G J van Genugten; Ad J M Hendrikx; Evert L Koldewijn; Barbara M A Schout; Irene M Tjiam; Jeroen J G van Merriënboer; Arno M M Muijtjens; Cordula Wagner Journal: J Endourol Date: 2016-01-22 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Barbara M A Schout; Bart L H Bemelmans; Elisabeth J Martens; Albert J J A Scherpbier; Ad J M Hendrikx Journal: J Urol Date: 2009-01-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Sarah H Bube; Pernille S Kingo; Mia G Madsen; Juan L Vásquez; Thomas Norus; Rikke G Olsen; Claus Dahl; Rikke B Hansen; Lars Konge; Nessn Azawi Journal: Eur Urol Open Sci Date: 2022-04-01