Face, Content, and Construct Validity Evaluation of Simulation Models in General Surgery Laparoscopic Training and Education: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic technical surgical skills (LTS) are considered a fundamental competence for General Surgery residents. Several simulation tools (ST) have been explored to develop LTS. Although a plethora of systematic reviews evaluate the translation of LTS developed in simulation to real surgery, there is a lack of evidence that clarifies effectiveness of different validated ST in acquisition of LTS in surgical residents. The aim of this systematic review (SR) is to summarize published evidence on ST validation used for surgery education and training.

METHODS

A protocol was published in PROSPERO. A SR was carried out following PRISMA guidelines. Complete published articles in English or Spanish that validate either content or construct, plus another form of validation of ST to acquire LTS in general surgery were included. Articles that used only one validation or did not validate an ST were excluded.

RESULTS

1052 publications were initially identified across all searched databases. Title review identified 204 studies eligible for full text screening. 10 studies were included for final review. Two studies assessed both face and content, 4 face and construct, and 4 face, content and construct validity. None of the studies presented comparable outcomes due to metrics variation and scores used for the validation strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

This study assessed validated laparoscopic simulation models, particularly in content and construct validity. Articles reported an increased use of simulation models in laparoscopic training with positive feedback from trainees, but few studies reported validation of training model. Validation strategies are not standardized, limiting comparability between them.

Viability and characterization trial of a novel method as an alternative to formaldehyde and Walter-Thiel cadaveric preservation for medical education and surgical simulation

INTRODUCTION

Despite its toxic and carcinogenic nature, formaldehyde is a widely used reactant for specimen preservation. With the need of specimens for both anatomical and surgical training, alternative preservation solutions (PS) have been proposed, however, their use is limited due to high costs and complexity. Hence, a new formaldehyde-free solution (FFS) is evaluated as a potential alternative for anatomical and surgical training.

METHODS

Qualitative and Quantitative data were acquired. Specimens preserved using three different methods were selected. Flexibility was measured by joints goniometry and pneumoperitoneum pressures were evaluated followed by an exploratory laparoscopy. Undergraduate student's perceptions on cadavers preserved with different PS were obtained using surveys and focus groups.

RESULTS

The main reason why cadaveric specimens were considered as useful tools was the perceived interaction with real tissues and the 'practical' concept of getting in touch with what students would be facing in the future as physicians, what we call "hands on" activities. FFS treated specimens showed better joint-movement ranges in comparison to other methods and pneumoperitoneum was acquired after 5mmHg CO₂ pressure. Students appreciated working with corpses regardless the technique used, however FFS specimens were defined as less uncomfortable, while presenting no sensory discomfort.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though alternative PS are effective, high costs and complexity restrict their usage. Cadavers preserved with FFS had similar range of movements compared with Thiel. Students preferred to work with FFS rather than FF due to flexibility, color, and no sensorial hassles. Thus, we propose FFS as viable alternative to traditional PS.

Viability and characterization trial of a novel method as an alternative to formaldehyde and Walter-Thiel cadaveric preservation for medical education and surgical simulation

INTRODUCTION

Despite its toxic and carcinogenic nature, formaldehyde is a widely used reactant for specimen preservation. With the need of specimens for both anatomical and surgical training, alternative preservation solutions (PS) have been proposed, however, their use is limited due to high costs and complexity. Hence, a new formaldehyde-free solution (FFS) is evaluated as a potential alternative for anatomical and surgical training.

METHODS

Qualitative and Quantitative data were acquired. Specimens preserved using three different methods were selected. Flexibility was measured by joints goniometry and pneumoperitoneum pressures were evaluated followed by an exploratory laparoscopy. Undergraduate student's perceptions on cadavers preserved with different PS were obtained using surveys and focus groups.

RESULTS

The main reason why cadaveric specimens were considered as useful tools was the perceived interaction with real tissues and the 'practical' concept of getting in touch with what students would be facing in the future as physicians, what we call "hands on" activities. FFS treated specimens showed better joint-movement ranges in comparison to other methods and pneumoperitoneum was acquired after 5mmHg CO2 pressure. Students appreciated working with corpses regardless the technique used, however FFS specimens were defined as less uncomfortable, while presenting no sensory discomfort.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though alternative PS are effective, high costs and complexity restrict their usage. Cadavers preserved with FFS had similar range of movements compared with Thiel. Students preferred to work with FFS rather than FF due to flexibility, color, and no sensorial hassles. Thus, we propose FFS as viable alternative to traditional PS.