Does perception of usefulness of arthroscopic simulators differ with levels of experience?

Digitally enhanced hands-on surgical training (DEHST) enhances the performance during freehand nail distal interlocking

PURPOSE

Freehand distal interlocking of intramedullary nails remains a challenging task. Recently, a new training device for digitally enhanced hands-on surgical training (DEHST) was introduced, potentially improving surgical skills needed for distal interlocking.

AIM

To evaluate whether training with DEHST enhances the performance of novices (first-year residents without surgical experience in freehand distal nail interlocking).

METHODS

Twenty novices were randomly assigned to two groups and performed distal interlocking of a tibia nail in mock operation under operation-room-like conditions. Participants in Group 1 were trained with DEHST (five distal interlocking attempts, 1 h of training), while those in Group 2 did not receive training. Time, number of X-rays shots, hole roundness in the X-rays projection and hit rates were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Time to complete the task [414.7 s (range 290-615)] and X-rays exposure [17.8 µGcm2 (range 9.8-26.4)] were significantly lower in Group 1 compared to Group 2 [623.4 s (range 339-1215), p = 0.041 and 32.6 µGcm2 (range 16.1-55.3), p = 0.003]. Hole projections were significantly rounder in Group 1 [95.0% (range 91.1-98.0) vs. 80.8% (range 70.1-88.9), p < 0.001]. In Group 1, 90% of the participants achieved successful completion of the task in contrast to a 60% success rate in Group 2. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.121).

CONCLUSIONS

In a mock-operational setting, training with DEHST significantly enhanced the performance of novices without surgical experience in distal interlocking of intramedullary nails and hence carries potential to improve safety and efficacy of this important and demanding surgical task to steepen the learning curve without endangering patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Construct Validity and Experience of Using a Low-cost Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery Simulator

Objective  To validate the low-cost model for arthroscopy training and analyze the acceptance and usefulness of the developed simulator in medical teaching and training. Method  Ten medical students, ten third-year orthopedic residents, and ten shoulder surgeons performed predetermined tasks on a shoulder simulator twice. The parameters used were time to complete the tasks, number of looks at the hands, GOALS score (Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills) and comparison between groups and within groups. An adapted Likert scale was applied addressing the individuals' impressions about the simulator and its applicability. Results  In the intergroup comparison, the shoulder surgeons had better scores and times than the other groups. When the tasks were repeated, the group of surgeons had a 59% improvement in time (p < 0.05), as did the group of medical students. In the GOALS score, shoulder surgeons had consistently better scores than the other groups. And when we evaluated the evolution from the first to the second test, the group of surgeons and the group of academics had a statistically significant improvement (p < 0.05). In terms of lookdowns, there was a decrease in all groups. There was consensus that the simulator is useful in training. Conclusion  The simulator developed allowed the differentiation between individuals with different levels of training in arthroscopic surgery. It was accepted by 100% of the participants as a useful tool in arthroscopic shoulder surgical training.

Current status of virtual reality simulation education for orthopedic residents: the need for a change in focus

Introduction

Advances in technology are changing surgical education. Simulation provides an important adjunct to operative experience. This pedagogy has arguably become more important in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, with resultant reduction in operative exposure for trainees. Virtual reality (VR) simulators may provide significant contribution to experiential learning; however, much of the investigative focus to date has, correctly, been on establishing validity evidence for these constructs. The aim of this work was to perform a scoping review to assess the current status of VR simulation education to determine curricular development efforts for orthopedic residents.

Methods

With a trained medical librarian, searches of PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were conducted for all articles in the last 10 years (September 2011-September 2021). Controlled vocabulary Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and natural language developed with subject matter experts describing virtual reality or VR simulation and orthopedic training were used. Two trained reviewers evaluated all abstracts for inclusion. Exclusion criteria were all articles that did not assess VR simulation education involving orthopedic residents. Data were extracted from the included full-text articles including: study design, type of participants, type of VR simulation, simulated orthopedic skill, type of educational event, learner assessment including Kirkpatrick's level, assessment of quality using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI), and level of effectiveness (LoE).

Results

Initial search identified 1,394 articles, of which 61 were included in the final qualitative synthesis. The majority (54%) were published in 2019- 2021, 49% in Europe. The commonest VR simulator was ArthroS (23%) and the commonest simulated skill was knee arthroscopy (33%). The majority of studies (70%) focused on simulator validation. Twenty-three studies described an educational module or curriculum, and of the 21 (34%) educational modules, 43% were one-off events. Most modules (18/21, 86%) assessed learners at Kirkpatrick level 2. With regard to methodological quality, 44% of studies had MERSQI 11.5-15 and 89% of studies had LoE of 2. Two studies had LoE of 3.

Conclusion

Current literature pertaining to VR training for orthopedic residents is focused on establishing validity and rarely forms part of a curriculum. Where the focus is education, the majority are discrete educational modules and do not teach a comprehensive amalgam of orthopedic skills. This suggests focus is needed to embed VR simulation training within formal curricula efforts guided by the work of Kern, and assess the efficacy of these against patient outcomes.

Validity of a Novel Digitally Enhanced Skills Training Station for Freehand Distal Interlocking

Background and Objectives: Freehand distal interlocking of intramedullary nails is technically demanding and prone to handling issues. It requires precise placement of a screw through the nail under fluoroscopy guidance and can result in a time consuming and radiation expensive procedure. Dedicated training could help overcome these problems. The aim of this study was to assess construct and face validity of new Digitally Enhanced Hands-On Surgical Training (DEHST) concept and device for training of distal interlocking of intramedullary nails. Materials and Methods: Twenty-nine novices and twenty-four expert surgeons performed interlocking on a DEHST device. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing captured performance metrics—number of X-rays, nail hole roundness, drill tip position and drill hole accuracy—between experts and novices. Face validity was evaluated with a questionnaire concerning training potential and quality of simulated reality using a 7-point Likert scale. Results: Face validity: mean realism of the training device was rated 6.3 (range 4–7). Training potential and need for distal interlocking training were both rated with a mean of 6.5 (range 5–7), with no significant differences between experts and novices, p ≥ 0.234. All participants (100%) stated that the device is useful for procedural training of distal nail interlocking, 96% wanted to have it at their institution and 98% would recommend it to colleagues. Construct validity: total number of X-rays was significantly higher for novices (20.9 ± 6.4 versus 15.5 ± 5.3, p = 0.003). Success rate (ratio of hit and miss attempts) was significantly higher for experts (novices hit: n = 15; 55.6%; experts hit: n = 19; 83%, p = 0.040). Conclusion: The evaluated training device for distal interlocking of intramedullary nails yielded high scores in terms of training capability and realism. Furthermore, construct validity was proven by reliably discriminating between experts and novices. Participants indicate high further training potential as the device may be easily adapted to other surgical tasks.

Artroscopia do ombro – Criação de um modelo de treinamento acessível

O objetivo do presente trabalho é criar um modelo de treinamento em artroscopia de ombro de baixo custo abaixo de 100 dólares, tornando-o acessível à capacitação prática de estudantes de medicina e residentes. O modelo foi criado utilizando um cano de PVC de 150 mm de diâmetro em 90 graus e um modelo de ombro sintético. O posicionamento das peças foi disposto de forma a simular a posição de decúbito lateral com membro superior em tração, frequente nas artroscopias. Para auxiliar no treinamento, foram demarcados pontos coloridos na glenóide e foi confeccionado um modelo de parte do manguito rotador na porção superior da escápula. Foi possível confeccionar um modelo para treinamento de artroscopia do ombro com um valor abaixo de 100 dólares, de fácil manufatura, que pode ser um auxiliar no treinamento de cirurgiões.

Active vs passive haptic feedback technology in virtual reality arthroscopy simulation: Which is most realistic?

BACKGROUND

Virtual Reality (VR) simulators are playing an increasingly prominent role in orthopaedic training and education. Face-validity - the degree to which reality is accurately represented - underpins the value of a VR simulator as a learning tool for trainees. Despite the importance of tactile feedback in arthroscopy, there is a paucity for evidence regarding the role of haptics in VR arthroscopy simulator realism.

PURPOSE

To assess the difference in face validity between two high fidelity VR simulators employing passive and active haptic feedback technology respectively.

METHOD

38 participants were recruited and divided into intermediate and expert groups based on orthopaedic training grade. Each participant completed a 12-point diagnostic knee arthroscopy VR module using the active haptic Simbionix ARTHRO Mentor and passive haptic VirtaMed ArthroS simulators. Subsequently, each participant completed a validated simulator face validity questionnaire.

RESULTS

The ARTHRO Mentor active haptic system failed to achieve face validity with mean scores for external appearance (6.61), intra-articular appearance (4.78) and instrumentation (4.36) falling below the acceptable threshold (≥7.0). The ArthroS passive haptic simulator demonstrated satisfactory scores in all domains: external appearance (8.42), intra-articular appearance (7.65), instrumentation (7.21) and was significantly (p < 0.001) more realistic than ARTHRO Mentor for all metrics. 61% of participants gave scores ≥7.0 for questions pertaining to haptic feedback realism from intra-articular structures such as menisci and ACL/PCL for the ArthroS vs. 12% for ARTHRO Mentor. There was no difference in face-validity perception between intermediate and expert groups for either simulator (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Current active haptic technology which employs motors to simulate tactile feedback fails to demonstrate sufficient face-validity or match the sophistication of passive haptic systems in high fidelity arthroscopy simulators. Textured rubber phantoms that mirror the anatomy and haptic properties of the knee joint provide a significantly more realistic training experience for both intermediate and expert arthroscopists.

Validation of Simendo Knee Arthroscopy Virtual Reality Simulator

PURPOSE

To determine the face and construct validity as well as educational value and user-friendliness of the Simendo knee arthroscopy virtual reality simulator.

METHODS

Sixty participants were recruited and equally divided into novices (0 arthroscopic procedures), intermediates (1-59 arthroscopic procedures), and experts (60 or more arthroscopic procedures). Participants were excluded if they had previously trained with the studied simulator. Construct validity, that is, the ability to discriminate between different levels of expertise, was examined by a navigation task. All participants were asked to perform 5 navigation trials within 10 minutes. Face validity, educational value, and user-friendliness were examined by questionnaires before and after the navigation trials. Face validity is the subjective impression of how closely the simulation replicates the real environment.

RESULTS

The novices were significantly slower than the intermediates in the first (P < .001) and the third (P = .031) trial. The novices were significantly slower than the experts in all trials (P = .016), except for the fifth (P = .054). The experts were significantly faster than the intermediates in every trial except for the fourth (P = .069). Median task time for the fifth trial was 63 seconds (44-80 seconds) for novices, 58 seconds (46-80 seconds) for intermediates, and 41 seconds (33-55 seconds) for experts. Ninety-two percent of all participants agreed that the simulator can be used to train for surgical inspection, and 95% indicated sufficient user-friendliness.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results, this knee simulator can be applied to train the basic arthroscopic hand-eye coordination skills at the start of resident education programs. Further testing is necessary to determine whether the skills are retained.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The simulator is partly validated, which contributes to training of basic arthroscopic skills without compromising patient safety.

Virtual reality hip arthroscopy simulator demonstrates sufficient face validity

PURPOSE

To test the face validity of the hip diagnostics module of a virtual reality hip arthroscopy simulator.

METHODS

A total of 25 orthopaedic surgeons, 7 faculty members and 18 orthopaedic residents, performed diagnostic supine hip arthroscopies of a healthy virtual reality hip joint using a 70° arthroscope. Twelve specific targets were visualised within the central compartment; six via the anterior portal, three via the anterolateral portal and three via the posterolateral portal. This task was immediately followed by a questionnaire regarding the realism and training capability of the system. This consisted of seven questions addressing the verisimilitude of the simulator and five questions addressing the training environment of the simulator. Each question consisted of a statement stem and 10-point Likert scale. Following similar work in surgical simulators, a rating of 7 or above was considered an acceptable level of realism.

RESULTS

The diagnostic hip arthroscopy module was found to have an acceptable level of realism in all domains apart from the tactile feedback received from the soft tissue. 23 out of 25 participants (92%) felt the simulator provided a non-threatening learning environment and 22 participants (88%) stated they enjoyed using the simulator. It was most frequently agreed that the level of trainees who would benefit most from the simulator were registrars and fellows (22 participants; 88%). Additionally, 21 of the participants (84%) agreed that this would be a beneficial training modality for foundation and core trainees, and 20 participants (80%) agreed that his would be beneficial for consultants.

CONCLUSIONS

This VR hip arthroscopy simulator was demonstrated to have a sufficient level of realism, thus establishing its face validity. These results suggest this simulator has sufficient realism for use in the acquisition of basic arthroscopic skills and supports its use in orthopaedics surgical training.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Teaching of distal radius shortening osteotomy: three-dimensional procedural simulator versus bone procedural simulator

In order to facilitate the learning of distal radius shortening osteotomy by junior surgeons, the main assumption was that using a three-dimensional procedural simulator was better than a bone procedural simulator. After viewing a video, ten junior surgeons performed a distal radius shortening osteotomy: five with a bone procedural simulator (Group 1) and five with a three-dimensional procedural simulator (Group 2). All subsequently performed the same surgery on fresh cadaveric bones. The duration of the procedure, shortening of the radius, and the level of osteotomy were significantly better in Group 2. The three-dimensional procedural simulator seems to teach distal radius osteotomy better than a bone model and could be useful in teaching and learning bone surgery of the wrist.

Efficacy of standardized training on a virtual reality simulator to advance knee and shoulder arthroscopic motor skills

Background

Most studies demonstrated, that training on a virtual reality based arthroscopy simulator leads to an improvement of technical skills in orthopaedic surgery. However, how long and what kind of training is optimal for young residents is unknown. In this study we tested the efficacy of a standardized, competency based training protocol on a validated virtual reality based knee- and shoulder arthroscopy simulator.

Methods

Twenty residents and five experts in arthroscopy were included. All participants performed a test including knee -and shoulder arthroscopy tasks on a virtual reality knee- and shoulder arthroscopy simulator. The residents had to complete a competency based training program. Thereafter, the previously completed test was retaken. We evaluated the metric data of the simulator using a z-score and the Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool (ASSET) to assess training effects in residents and performance levels in experts.

Results

The residents significantly improved from pre- to post training in the overall z-score: − 9.82 (range, − 20.35 to − 1.64) to − 2.61 (range, − 6.25 to 1.5); p < 0.001. The overall ASSET score improved from 55 (27 to 84) percent to 75 (48 to 92) percent; p < 0.001. The experts, however, achieved a significantly higher z-score in the shoulder tasks (p < 0.001 and a statistically insignificantly higher z-score in the knee tasks with a p = 0.921. The experts mean overall ASSET score (knee and shoulder) was significantly higher in the therapeutic tasks (p < 0.001) compared to the residents post training result.

Conclusions

The use of a competency based simulator training with this specific device for 3-5 h is an effective tool to advance basic arthroscopic skills of resident in training from 0 to 5 years based on simulator measures and simulator based ASSET testing. Therefore, we conclude that this sort of training method appears useful to learn the handling of the camera, basic anatomy and the triangulation with instruments.

Application of virtual reality technology in clinical medicine

The present review discusses the application of virtual reality (VR) technology in clinical medicine, especially in surgical training, pain management and therapeutic treatment of mental illness. We introduce the common types of VR simulators and their operational principles in aforementioned fields. The clinical effects are also discussed. In almost every study that dealt with VR simulators, researchers have arrived at the same conclusion that both doctors and patients could benefit from this novel technology. Moreover, advantages and disadvantages of the utilization of VR technology in each field were discussed, and the future research directions were proposed.

Design and evaluation of a new synthetic wrist procedural simulator (Wristsim®) for training of distal radius fracture fixation by volar plating

Legislation concerning workload of surgical trainees and pressure to reduce learning curves have forced us reconsider surgical training. Our goal was to evaluate a synthetic procedural simulator for teaching open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of distal radius fractures (DRF). Twenty surgeons used a synthetic procedural simulator (Wristsim^®) made by 3D printing for ORIF of DRF with a volar plate (Newclip Technics^®). The evaluation consisted of grading the simulator's realism compared to the surgeons' own experience with surgery on cadavers. The Wristsim^® was graded 5.10/10, compared to 8.18/10 for the cadaver specimen for introduction of the plate under pronator quadratus. For fracture reproduction, Wristsim^® scored 6.40/10, with the cadaver specimen scoring 7.15/10. For fracture reduction, Wristsim^® scored 5.62/10, with the cadaver specimen scoring 7.38/10. Plate application was scored 7.05/10 for Wristsim^® and 8.23/10 for the cadaver. Drilling was scored 6.60/10 for the Wristsim^® and 8.23/10 for the cadaver. Screw fixation was scored 7.40/10 for the Wristsim^® and 8.12/10 for the cadaver. Our results demonstrated that Wristsim^® is still inferior to a cadaver specimen for teaching ORIF by volar plating of DRF. A new model of Wristsim^® is being developed that will address shortcomings in pronator quadratus thickness, passive ROM in flexion/extension and bone size.

Validation of an Arthroscopic Training Device

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.

Computer-Simulated Arthroscopic Knee Surgery: Effects of Distraction on Resident Performance

Orthopedic surgeons cite "full focus" and "distraction control" as important factors for achieving excellent outcomes. Surgical simulation is a safe and cost-effective way for residents to practice surgical skills, and it is a suitable tool to study the effects of distraction on resident surgical performance. This study investigated the effects of distraction on arthroscopic knee simulator performance among residents at various levels of experience. The authors hypothesized that environmental distractions would negatively affect performance. Twenty-five orthopedic surgery residents performed a diagnostic knee arthroscopy computer simulation according to a checklist of structures to identify and tasks to complete. Participants were evaluated on arthroscopy time, number of chondral injuries, instances of looking down at their hands, and completion of checklist items. Residents repeated this task at least 2 weeks later while simultaneously answering distracting questions. During distracted simulation, the residents had significantly fewer completed checklist items (P<.02) compared with the initial simulation. Senior residents completed the initial simulation in less time (P<.001), with fewer chondral injuries (P<.005) and fewer instances of looking down at their hands (P<.012), compared with junior residents. Senior residents also completed 97% of the diagnostic checklist, whereas junior residents completed 89% (P<.019). During distracted simulation, senior residents continued to complete tasks more quickly (P<.006) and with fewer instances of looking down at their hands (P<.042). Residents at all levels appear to be susceptible to the detrimental effects of distraction when performing arthroscopic simulation. Addressing even straightforward questions intraoperatively may affect surgeon performance.

Simulation in shoulder surgery

Simulation is a rapidly developing field in medical education. There is a growing need for trainee surgeons to acquire surgical skills in a cost-effective learning environment to improve patient safety and compensate for a reduction in training time and operative experience. Although simulation is not a replacement for traditional models of surgical training, and robust assessment metrics need to be validated before widespread use for accreditation, it is a useful adjunct that may ultimately lead to improving surgical outcomes for our patients.

Validation of the PASSPORT V2 training environment for arthroscopic skills

PURPOSE

Virtual reality simulators used in the education of orthopaedic residents often lack realistic haptic feedback. To solve this, the (Practice Arthroscopic Surgical Skills for Perfect Operative Real-life Treatment) PASSPORT simulator was developed, which was subjected to fundamental changes: improved realism and user interface. The purpose was to demonstrate its face and construct validity.

METHODS

Thirty-one participants were divided into three groups having different levels of arthroscopic experience. Participants answered questions regarding general information and the outer appearance of the simulator for face validity. Construct validity was assessed with one standardized navigation task, which was timed. Face validity, educational value and user-friendliness were determined with two representative exercises and by asking participants to fill out the questionnaire. A value of 7 or greater was considered sufficient.

RESULTS

Construct validity was demonstrated between experts and novices. Median task time for the fifth trial was 55 s (range 17-139 s) for the novices, 33 s (range 17-59 s) for the intermediates, and 26 s (range 14-52 s) for the experts. Median task times of three trials were not significantly different between the novices and intermediates, and none of the trials between intermediates and experts. Face validity, educational value and user-friendliness were perceived as sufficient (median >7). The presence of realistic tactile feedback was considered the biggest asset of the simulator.

CONCLUSION

Proper preparation for arthroscopic operations will increase the quality of real-life surgery and patients' safety. The PASSPORT simulator can assist in achieving this, as it showed construct and face validity, and its physical nature offered adequate haptic feedback during training. This indicates that PASSPORT has potential to evolve as a valuable training modality.

Validation of a virtual reality-based simulator for shoulder arthroscopy

PURPOSE

This study was to determine face and construct validity of a new virtual reality-based shoulder arthroscopy simulator which uses passive haptic feedback.

METHODS

Fifty-one participants including 25 novices (<20 shoulder arthroscopies) and 26 experts (>100 shoulder arthroscopies) completed two tests: for assessment of face validity, a questionnaire was filled out concerning quality of simulated reality and training potential using a 7-point Likert scale (range 1-7). Construct validity was tested by comparing simulator metrics (operation time in seconds, camera and grasper pathway in centimetre and grasper openings) between novices and experts test results.

RESULTS

Overall simulated reality was rated high with a median value of 5.5 (range 2.8-7) points. Training capacity scored a median value of 5.8 (range 3-7) points. Experts were significantly faster in the diagnostic test with a median of 91 (range 37-208) s than novices with 1177 (range 81-383) s (p < 0.0001) and in the therapeutic test 102 (range 58-283) s versus 229 (range 114-399) s (p < 0.0001). Similar results were seen in the other metric values except in the camera pathway in the therapeutic test.

CONCLUSION

The tested simulator achieved high scores in terms of realism and training capability. It reliably discriminated between novices and experts. Further improvements of the simulator, especially in the field of therapeutic arthroscopy, might improve its value as training and assessment tool for shoulder arthroscopy skills.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Comparison of Three Virtual Reality Arthroscopic Simulators as Part of an Orthopedic Residency Educational Curriculum

PURPOSE

Orthopedic education continues to move towards evidence-based curriculum in order to comply with new residency accreditation mandates. There are currently three high fidelity arthroscopic virtual reality (VR) simulators available, each with multiple instructional modules and simulated arthroscopic procedures. The aim of the current study is to assess face validity, defined as the degree to which a procedure appears effective in terms of its stated aims, of three available VR simulators.

METHODS

Thirty subjects were recruited from a single orthopedic residency training program. Each subject completed one training session on each of the three leading VR arthroscopic simulators (ARTHRO mentor-Symbionix, ArthroS-Virtamed, and ArthroSim-Toltech). Each arthroscopic session involved simulator-specific modules. After training sessions, subjects completed a previously validated simulator questionnaire for face validity.

RESULTS

The median external appearances for the ARTHRO Mentor (9.3, range 6.7-10.0; p=0.0036) and ArthroS (9.3, range 7.3-10.0; p=0.0003) were statistically higher than for Arthro- Sim (6.7, range 3.3-9.7). There was no statistical difference in intraarticular appearance, instrument appearance, or user friendliness between the three groups. Most simulators reached an appropriate level of proportion of sufficient scores for each categor y (≥70%), except for ARTHRO Mentor (intraarticular appearance-50%; instrument appearance- 61.1%) and ArthroSim (external appearance- 50%; user friendliness-68.8%).

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrate that ArthroS has the highest overall face validity of the three current arthroscopic VR simulators. However, only external appearance for ArthroS reached statistical significance when compared to the other simulators. Additionally, each simulator had satisfactory intraarticular quality. This study helps further the understanding of VR simulation and necessary features for accurate arthroscopic representation. This data also provides objective data for educators when selecting equipment that will best facilitate residency training.

Effectiveness of Virtual Reality Training in Orthopaedic Surgery

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review to determine the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) training in orthopaedic surgery.

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic review was performed of articles of VR training in orthopaedic surgery published up to November 2014 from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases.

RESULTS

We included 10 relevant trials of 91 identified articles, which all reported on training in arthroscopic surgery (shoulder, n = 5; knee, n = 4; undefined, n = 1). A total of 303 participants were involved. Assessment after training was made on a simulator in 9 of the 10 studies, and in one study it took place in the operating room (OR) on a real patient. A total of 32 different outcomes were extracted; 29 of them were about skills assessment. None involved a patient-related outcome. One study focused on anatomic learning, and the other evaluated technical task performance before and after training on a VR simulator. Five studies established construct validity. Three studies reported a statistically significant improvement in technical skills after training on a VR simulator.

CONCLUSIONS

VR training leads to an improvement of technical skills in orthopaedic surgery. Before its widespread use, additional trials are needed to clarify the transfer of VR training to the OR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review of Level I through Level IV studies.

Validation of the ArthroS virtual reality simulator for arthroscopic skills

PURPOSE

Virtual reality simulator training has become important for acquiring arthroscopic skills. A new simulator for knee arthroscopy ArthroS™ has been developed. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate face and construct validity, executed according to a protocol used previously to validate arthroscopic simulators.

METHODS

Twenty-seven participants were divided into three groups having different levels of arthroscopic experience. Participants answered questions regarding general information and the outer appearance of the simulator for face validity. Construct validity was assessed with one standardized navigation task. Face validity, educational value and user friendliness were further determined by giving participants three exercises and by asking them to fill out the questionnaire.

RESULTS

Construct validity was demonstrated between experts and beginners. Median task times were not significantly different for all repetitions between novices and intermediates, and between intermediates and experts. Median face validity was 8.3 for the outer appearance, 6.5 for the intra-articular joint and 4.7 for surgical instruments. Educational value and user friendliness were perceived as nonsatisfactory, especially because of the lack of tactile feedback.

CONCLUSION

The ArthroS™ demonstrated construct validity between novices and experts, but did not demonstrate full face validity. Future improvements should be mainly focused on the development of tactile feedback. It is necessary that a newly presented simulator is validated to prove it actually contributes to proficiency of skills.

Evaluation of a virtual-reality-based simulator using passive haptic feedback for knee arthroscopy

PURPOSE

The aim of this work is to determine face validity and construct validity of a new virtual-reality-based simulator for diagnostic and therapeutic knee arthroscopy.

METHODS

The study tests a novel arthroscopic simulator based on passive haptics. Sixty-eight participants were grouped into novices, intermediates, and experts. All participants completed two exercises. In order to establish face validity, all participants filled out a questionnaire concerning different aspects of simulator realism, training capacity, and different statements using a seven-point Likert scale (range 1-7). Construct validity was tested by comparing various simulator metric values between novices and experts.

RESULTS

Face validity could be established: overall realism was rated with a mean value of 5.5 points. Global training capacity scored a mean value of 5.9. Participants considered the simulator as useful for procedural training of diagnostic and therapeutic arthroscopy. In the foreign body removal exercise, experts were overall significantly faster in the whole procedure (6 min 24 s vs. 8 min 24 s, p < 0.001), took less time to complete the diagnostic tour (2 min 49 s vs. 3 min 32 s, p = 0.027), and had a shorter camera path length (186 vs. 246 cm, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

The simulator achieved high scores in terms of realism. It was regarded as a useful training tool, which is also capable of differentiating between varying levels of arthroscopic experience. Nevertheless, further improvements of the simulator especially in the field of therapeutic arthroscopy are desirable. In general, the findings support that virtual-reality-based simulation using passive haptics has the potential to complement conventional training of knee arthroscopy skills.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Surgical skills simulation in trauma and orthopaedic training

Changing patterns of health care delivery and the rapid evolution of orthopaedic surgical techniques have made it increasingly difficult for trainees to develop expertise in their craft. Working hour restrictions and a drive towards senior led care demands that proficiency be gained in a shorter period of time whilst requiring a greater skill set than that in the past. The resulting conflict between service provision and training has necessitated the development of alternative methods in order to compensate for the reduction in ‘hands-on’ experience. Simulation training provides the opportunity to develop surgical skills in a controlled environment whilst minimising risks to patient safety, operating theatre usage and financial expenditure. Many options for simulation exist within orthopaedics from cadaveric or prosthetic models, to arthroscopic simulators, to advanced virtual reality and three-dimensional software tools. There are limitations to this form of training, but it has significant potential for trainees to achieve competence in procedures prior to real-life practice. The evidence for its direct transferability to operating theatre performance is limited but there are clear benefits such as increasing trainee confidence and familiarity with equipment. With progressively improving methods of simulation available, it is likely to become more important in the ongoing and future training and assessment of orthopaedic surgeons.

How valid are commercially available medical simulators?

BACKGROUND

Since simulators offer important advantages, they are increasingly used in medical education and medical skills training that require physical actions. A wide variety of simulators have become commercially available. It is of high importance that evidence is provided that training on these simulators can actually improve clinical performance on live patients. Therefore, the aim of this review is to determine the availability of different types of simulators and the evidence of their validation, to offer insight regarding which simulators are suitable to use in the clinical setting as a training modality.

SUMMARY

Four hundred and thirty-three commercially available simulators were found, from which 405 (94%) were physical models. One hundred and thirty validation studies evaluated 35 (8%) commercially available medical simulators for levels of validity ranging from face to predictive validity. Solely simulators that are used for surgical skills training were validated for the highest validity level (predictive validity). Twenty-four (37%) simulators that give objective feedback had been validated. Studies that tested more powerful levels of validity (concurrent and predictive validity) were methodologically stronger than studies that tested more elementary levels of validity (face, content, and construct validity).

CONCLUSION

Ninety-three point five percent of the commercially available simulators are not known to be tested for validity. Although the importance of (a high level of) validation depends on the difficulty level of skills training and possible consequences when skills are insufficient, it is advisable for medical professionals, trainees, medical educators, and companies who manufacture medical simulators to critically judge the available medical simulators for proper validation. This way adequate, safe, and affordable medical psychomotor skills training can be achieved.

The role of simulation in developing surgical skills

Surgical training has followed the master-apprentice model for centuries but is currently undergoing a paradigm shift. The traditional model is inefficient with no guarantee of case mix, quality, or quantity. There is a growing focus on competency-based medical education in response to restrictions on doctors' working hours and the traditional mantra of "see one, do one, teach one" is being increasingly questioned. The medical profession is subject to more scrutiny than ever before and is facing mounting financial, clinical, and political pressures. Simulation may be a means of addressing these challenges. It provides a way for trainees to practice technical tasks in a protected environment without putting patients at risk and helps to shorten the learning curve. The evidence for simulation-based training in orthopedic surgery using synthetic models, cadavers, and virtual reality simulators is constantly developing, though further work is needed to ensure the transfer of skills to the operating theatre.

Experience-based virtual training system for knee arthroscopic inspection

Background

Arthroscopic surgical training is inherently difficult due to limited visibility, reduced motion freedom and non-intuitive hand-eye coordination. Traditional training methods as well as virtual reality approach lack the direct guidance of an experienced physician.

Methods

This paper presents an experience-based arthroscopic training simulator that integrates motion tracking with a haptic device to record and reproduce the complex trajectory of an arthroscopic inspection procedure. Optimal arthroscopic operations depend on much practice because the knee joint space is narrow and the anatomic structures are complex. The trajectory of the arthroscope from the experienced surgeon can be captured during the clinical treatment. Then a haptic device is used to guide the trainees in the virtual environment to follow the trajectory.

Results

In this paper, an experiment for the eight subjects’ performance of arthroscopic inspection on the same simulator was done with and without the force guidance. The experiment reveals that most subjects’ performances are better after they repeated the same inspection five times. Furthermore, most subjects’ performances with the force guidance are better than those without the force guidance. In the experiment, the average error with the force guidance is 33.01% lower than that without the force guidance. The operation time with the force guidance is 14.95% less than that without the force guidance.

Conclusions

We develop a novel virtual knee arthroscopic training system with virtual and haptic guidance. Compared to traditional VR training system that only has a single play-script based on a virtual model, the proposed system can track and reproduce real-life arthroscopic procedures and create a useful training database. From our experiment, the force guidance can efficiently shorten the learning curve of novice trainees. Through such system, novice trainees can efficiently develop required surgical skills by the virtual and haptic guidance from an experienced surgeon.

Development of a model for teaching manipulation of a distal radial fracture

BACKGROUND

Recent reports indicate that there is a trend toward the use of models and simulators to teach basic orthopaedic operative skills. We describe a high-fidelity model for teaching basic orthopaedic fracture manipulation.

METHODS

A model of a distal radial fracture was developed and validated by orthopaedic surgeons with different levels of experience, who examined and manipulated the model and then completed a structured questionnaire.

RESULTS

The participants mostly agreed (designated as 4 in the questionnaire) that the model performed well on the degree to which the manipulation represented real life. The participants agreed (designated as 5 in the questionnaire) that the model scored high on the appearance and feel of the fracture and its ability to be used as a teaching tool. There was no difference between perceptions of participants with regard to different levels of occupational experience or model use.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe that this model could be used to teach the skill of closed reduction of a distal radial fracture in the preclinical setting.