Advertisement

Validation of an Arthroscopic Training Device

Published:December 03, 2016DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2016.08.026

      Purpose

      To investigate the usefulness and conduct validation of a simulated arthroscopy training device to train basic arthroscopy skills.

      Methods

      Forty-six participants including 12 novices, 12 intermediates, and 22 experts completed a questionnaire regarding demographics, previous arthroscopic experience, training potential, and statements about the device. Furthermore, participants performed a single task on the arthroscopic training device using the 0° camera and a probe. The task consisted of an attempt to carry a rubber ring across a helix inside a box as fast as possible. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing total task time and portal replacements of the camera and probe between all groups (median values [interquartile range]; Kruskal-Wallis test).

      Results

      The median age was 35 (29-44) years. There were 4 female and 42 male participants. A total of 89% of the participants graded the overall training capacity ≥5 (35% graded it as 5, 39% as 6, and 15% as 7), and 83% believed that it is useful to improve any kind of arthroscopy. Ninety-three percent of the participants would recommend the arthroscopic training device to their colleagues. Sixty-one percent of the participants stated that there are certain disadvantages. The median time to complete the task was 108 (58-236) seconds. Novices (259 [123-435] seconds) performed tasks significantly slower than intermediates (169 [67-257] seconds) and experts (75 [49-132] seconds) (P = .005). Furthermore, portal changes were significantly more common in novices and intermediates than experts (P = .019).

      Conclusions

      High scores in training potential were achieved with this arthroscopy simulator box, and most study participants believed that practice with the arthroscopic training device is useful for any kind of arthroscopy. Construct validity was established since novices, intermediates, and experts in real arthroscopy were discriminated with the arthroscopic training device in terms of time to successful completion of a task. However, 61% of the participants stated that there were certain disadvantages.

      Clinical Relevance

      In every training tool using simulation, it is crucial to pass the first steps in the validation cascade. This study provides this step for further evaluation of this arthroscopic training device.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Arthroscopy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Scott D.J.
        • Bergen P.C.
        • Rege R.V.
        • et al.
        Laparoscopic training on bench models: Better and more cost effective than operating room experience?.
        J Am Coll Surg. 2000; 191: 272-283
        • Rosenthal R.
        • Gantert W.A.
        • Scheidegger D.
        • Oertli D.
        Can skills assessment on a virtual reality trainer predict a surgical trainee's talent in laparoscopic surgery?.
        Surg Endosc. 2006; 20: 1286-1290
        • Aggarwal R.
        • Moorthy K.
        • Darzi A.
        Laparoscopic skills training and assessment.
        Br J Surg. 2004; 91: 1549-1558
        • Hall M.P.
        • Kaplan K.M.
        • Gorczynski C.T.
        • Zuckerman J.D.
        • Rosen J.E.
        Assessment of arthroscopic training in U.S. orthopedic surgery residency programs—a resident self-assessment.
        Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2010; 68: 5-10
        • Howells N.R.
        • Gill H.S.
        • Carr A.J.
        • Price A.J.
        • Rees J.L.
        Transferring simulated arthroscopic skills to the operating theatre: A randomised blinded study.
        J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008; 90: 494-499
        • Atesok K.
        • Mabrey J.D.
        • Jazrawi L.M.
        • Egol K.A.
        Surgical simulation in orthopaedic skills training.
        J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2012; 20: 410-422
        • Gomoll A.H.
        • Pappas G.
        • Forsythe B.
        • Warner J.J.P.
        Individual skill progression on a virtual reality simulator for shoulder arthroscopy: A 3-year follow-up study.
        Am J Sports Med. 2008; 36: 1139-1142
        • Frank R.M.
        • Erickson B.
        • Frank J.M.
        • et al.
        Utility of modern arthroscopic simulator training models.
        Arthroscopy. 2014; 30: 121-133
        • Coughlin R.P.
        • Pauyo T.
        • Sutton J.C.
        • Coughlin L.P.
        • Bergeron S.G.
        A validated orthopaedic surgical simulation model for training and evaluation of basic arthroscopic skills.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015; 97: 1465-1471
        • Jentzsch T.
        • Rahm S.
        • Seifert B.
        • Farei-Campagna J.
        • Werner C.M.L.
        • Bouaicha S.
        Correlation between arthroscopy simulator and video game performance: A cross-sectional study of 30 volunteers comparing 2- and 3-dimensional video games.
        Arthroscopy. 2016; 32: 1328-1334
        • Moorthy K.
        • Munz Y.
        • Sarker S.K.
        • Darzi A.
        Objective assessment of technical skills in surgery.
        BMJ. 2003; 327: 1032-1037
        • Basdogan C.
        • Sedef M.
        • Harders M.
        • Wesarg S.
        VR-based simulators for training in minimally invasive surgery.
        IEEE Comput Graph Appl. 2007; 27: 54-66
        • Haque S.
        • Srinivasan S.
        A meta-analysis of the training effectiveness of virtual reality surgical simulators.
        IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed. 2006; 10: 51-58
        • Modi C.S.
        • Morris G.
        • Mukherjee R.
        Computer-simulation training for knee and shoulder arthroscopic surgery.
        Arthroscopy. 2010; 26: 832-840
        • Sutherland L.M.
        • Middleton P.F.
        • Anthony A.
        • et al.
        Surgical simulation: A systematic review.
        Ann Surg. 2006; 243: 291-300
        • Tuijthof G.J.M.
        • Visser P.
        • Sierevelt I.N.
        • Dijk C.N.
        • Kerkhoffs G.M.
        Does perception of usefulness of arthroscopic simulators differ with levels of experience?.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469: 1701-1708
        • Pedowitz R.A.
        • Marsh J.L.
        Motor skills training in orthopaedic surgery: A paradigm shift toward a simulation-based educational curriculum.
        J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2012; 20: 407-409
        • Koehler R.J.
        • Nicandri G.T.
        Using the arthroscopic surgery skill evaluation tool as a pass-fail examination.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013; 95: e1871
        • Fucentese S.F.
        • Rahm S.
        • Wieser K.
        • Spillmann J.
        • Harders M.
        • Koch P.P.
        Evaluation of a virtual-reality-based simulator using passive haptic feedback for knee arthroscopy.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015; 23: 1077-1085
        • Moody L.
        • Waterworth A.
        • McCarthy A.D.
        • Harley P.J.
        The feasibility of a mixed reality surgical training environment.
        Virtual Reality. 2008; 12: 77-86
        • Moody L.
        • Waterworth A.
        • Arthur J.G.
        • McCarthy A.D.
        Beyond the visuals: Tactile augmentation and sensory enhancement in an arthroscopy simulator.
        Virtual Reality. 2009; 13: 59-68
        • Stunt J.J.
        • Kerkhoffs G.M.M.J.
        • van Dijk C.N.
        • Tuijthof G.J.M.
        Validation of the ArthroS virtual reality simulator for arthroscopic skills.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015; 23: 3436-3442
        • Aggarwal R.
        • Tully A.
        • Grantcharov T.
        • et al.
        Virtual reality simulation training can improve technical skills during laparoscopic salpingectomy for ectopic pregnancy.
        BJOG. 2006; 113: 1382-1387
        • Gallagher A.G.
        • Ritter E.M.
        • Satava R.M.
        Fundamental principles of validation, and reliability: Rigorous science for the assessment of surgical education and training.
        Surg Endosc. 2003; 17: 1525-1529
        • Carter F.J.
        • Schijven M.P.
        • Aggarwal R.
        • et al.
        Consensus guidelines for validation of virtual reality surgical simulators.
        Simul Healthc. 2006; 1: 171-179
        • Bajka M.
        • Tuchschmid S.
        • Streich M.
        • Fink D.
        • Székely G.
        • Harders M.
        Evaluation of a new virtual-reality training simulator for hysteroscopy.
        Surg Endosc. 2008; 23: 2026-2033
        • Larsen C.R.
        • Soerensen J.L.
        • Grantcharov T.P.
        • et al.
        Effect of virtual reality training on laparoscopic surgery: Randomised controlled trial.
        BMJ. 2009; 338: b1802
        • Schijven M.
        • Jakimowicz J.
        Construct validity: Experts and novices performing on the Xitact LS500 laparoscopy simulator.
        Surg Endosc. 2003; 17: 803-810
        • Pedowitz R.A.
        • Esch J.
        • Snyder S.
        Evaluation of a virtual reality simulator for arthroscopy skills development.
        Arthroscopy. 2002; 18: E29
        • Khalifa Y.M.
        • Bogorad D.
        • Gibson V.
        • Peifer J.
        • Nussbaum J.
        Virtual reality in ophthalmology training.
        Surv Ophthalmol. 2006; 51: 259-273
        • Bayona S.
        • Fernández-Arroyo J.M.
        • Martín I.
        • Bayona P.
        Assessment study of insight ARTHRO VR ® arthroscopy virtual training simulator: Face, content, and construct validities.
        J Robotic Surg. 2008; 2: 151-158
        • Koch F.
        • Koss M.J.
        • Singh P.
        • Naser H.
        Virtual reality in ophthalmology.
        Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2009; 226 ([in German]): 672-676
        • Larsen C.
        • Grantcharov T.
        • Schouenborg L.
        • Ottosen C.
        • Soerensen J.
        • Ottesen B.
        Objective assessment of surgical competence in gynaecological laparoscopy: Development and validation of a procedure-specific rating scale.
        BJOG. 2008; 115: 908-916
        • Woodrum D.T.
        • Andreatta P.B.
        • Yellamanchilli R.K.
        • Feryus L.
        • Gauger P.G.
        • Minter R.M.
        Construct validity of the LapSim laparoscopic surgical simulator.
        Am J Surg. 2006; 191: 28-32
        • Schijven M.P.
        • Jakimowicz J.
        The learning curve on the Xitact LS 500 laparoscopy simulator: profiles of performance.
        Surg Endosc. 2004; 18: 121-127
        • Bajka M.
        • Tuchschmid S.
        • Fink D.
        • Székely G.
        • Harders M.
        Establishing construct validity of a virtual-reality training simulator for hysteroscopy via a multimetric scoring system.
        Surg Endosc. 2009; 24: 79-88
        • Srivastava S.
        • Youngblood P.L.
        • Rawn C.
        • Hariri S.
        • Heinrichs W.L.
        • Ladd A.L.
        Initial evaluation of a shoulder arthroscopy simulator: Establishing construct validity.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2004; 13: 196-205
        • Farnworth L.R.
        • Lemay D.E.
        • Wooldridge T.
        • et al.
        A comparison of operative times in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction between orthopaedic faculty and residents: The financial impact of orthopaedic surgical training in the operating room.
        Iowa Orthop J. 2001; 21: 31-35
        • Braman J.P.
        • Sweet R.M.
        • Hananel D.M.
        • Ludewig P.M.
        • Van Heest A.E.
        Development and validation of a basic arthroscopy skills simulator.
        Arthroscopy. 2015; 31: 104-112
        • Martin K.D.
        • Patterson D.
        • Phisitkul P.
        • Cameron K.L.
        • Femino J.
        • Amendola A.
        Ankle arthroscopy simulation improves basic skills, anatomic recognition, and proficiency during diagnostic examination of residents in training.
        Foot Ankle Int. 2015; 36: 827-835
        • Debas H.T.
        • Bass B.L.
        • Brennan M.F.
        • et al.
        American Surgical Association Blue Ribbon Committee Report on Surgical Education: 2004.
        Ann Surg. 2005; 241: 1-8
        • Scott D.J.
        • Valentine R.J.
        • Bergen P.C.
        • et al.
        Evaluating surgical competency with the American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination, skill testing, and intraoperative assessment.
        Surgery. 2000; 128: 613-622