Arthroscopic proficiency: methods in evaluating competency

BMC Medical Education

Christian Veillette²  Justin L Hodgins¹ 

[1] Division of Orthopaedics, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Canada;University of Toronto Sports Medicine Program, Women’s CollegeHospital, Toronto, Canada

关键词: Task performance;    Surgical training;    Competency;    Arthroscopy;   

Others  :  1138933
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6920-13-61

 received in 2012-06-07, accepted in 2013-04-22,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The current paradigm of arthroscopic training lacks objective evaluation of technical ability and its adequacy is concerning given the accelerating complexity of the field. To combat insufficiencies, emphasis is shifting towards skill acquisition outside the operating room and sophisticated assessment tools. We reviewed (1) the validity of cadaver and surgical simulation in arthroscopic training, (2) the role of psychomotor analysis and arthroscopic technical ability, (3) what validated assessment tools are available to evaluate technical competency, and (4) the quantification of arthroscopic proficiency.

Methods

The Medline and Embase databases were searched for published articles in the English literature pertaining to arthroscopic competence, arthroscopic assessment and evaluation and objective measures of arthroscopic technical skill. Abstracts were independently evaluated and exclusion criteria included articles outside the scope of knee and shoulder arthroscopy as well as original articles about specific therapies, outcomes and diagnoses leaving 52 articles citied in this review.

Results

Simulated arthroscopic environments exhibit high levels of internal validity and consistency for simple arthroscopic tasks, however the ability to transfer complex skills to the operating room has not yet been established. Instrument and force trajectory data can discriminate between technical ability for basic arthroscopic parameters and may serve as useful adjuncts to more comprehensive techniques. There is a need for arthroscopic assessment tools for standardized evaluation and objective feedback of technical skills, yet few comprehensive instruments exist, especially for the shoulder. Opinion on the required arthroscopic experience to obtain proficiency remains guarded and few governing bodies specify absolute quantities.

Conclusions

Further validation is required to demonstrate the transfer of complex arthroscopic skills from simulated environments to the operating room and provide objective parameters to base evaluation. There is a deficiency of validated assessment tools for technical competencies and little consensus of what constitutes a sufficient case volume within the arthroscopy community.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Hodgins and Veillette; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Garrett WE Jr, Swiontkowski MF, Weinstein JN, Callaghan J, Rosier RN, Berry DJ, Harrast J, Derosa GP: American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Practice of the Orthopaedic Surgeon: Part-II, certification examination case mix. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006, 88:660-667.
• [2]Farnworth LR, Lemay DE, Wooldridge T, Mabrey JD, Blaschak MJ, DeCoster TA, Wascher DC, Schenck RC Jr: 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.
• [3]Bridges M, Diamond DL: The financial impact of teaching surgical residents in the operating room. Am J Surg 1999, 177:28-32.
• [4]Cannon WD, Eckhoff DG, Garrett WE Jr, Hunter RE, Sweeney HJ: Report of a group developing a virtual reality simulator for arthroscopic surgery of the knee joint. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006, 442:21-29.
• [5]Gomoll AH, O’Toole RV, Czarnecki J, Warner JJ: Surgical experience correlates with performance on a virtual reality simulator for shoulder arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med 2007, 35:883-888.
• [6]Irani JL, Mello MM, Ashley SW: Surgical residents' perceptions of the effects of the ACGME duty hour requirements 1 year after implementation. Surgery 2005, 138(2):246-253.
• [7]Zuckerman JD, Kubiak EN, Immerman I, Dicesare P: The early effects of code 405 work rules on attitudes of orthopaedic residents and attending surgeons. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87(4):903-908.
• [8]Ritchie WP Jr: The measure of competence: Current plans and future initiatives of the American Board of Surgery. Bull Am Coll Surg 2001, 86:10-15.
• [9]Michelson JD: Simulation in orthopaedic education: an overview of theory and practice. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006, 88:1405-1411.
• [10]Gomoll AH, Pappas G, Forsythe B, Warner JJ: 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.
• [11]Pedowitz RA, Esch J, Snyder S: Evaluation of a virtual reality simulator for arthroscopy skills development. Arthroscopy 2002, 18:E29.
• [12]McCarthy A, Harley P, Smallwood R: Virtual arthroscopy training: do the “virtual skills” developed match the real skills required? Stud Health Technol Inform 1999, 62:221-227.
• [13]Howells NR, Gill HS, Carr AJ, Price AJ, Rees JL: Transferring simulated arthroscopic skills to the operating theatre: a randomised blinded study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008, 90:494-499.
• [14]Srivastava S, Youngblood PL, Rawn C, Hariri S, Heinrichs WL, Ladd AL: Initial evaluation of a shoulder arthroscopy simulator: establishing construct validity. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2004, 13:196-205.
• [15]Martin KD, Belmont PJ, Schoenfeld AJ, Todd M, Cameron KL, Owens BD: Arthroscopic basic task performance in shoulder simulator model correlates with similar task performance in cadavers. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011, 93(21):e1271-e1275.
• [16]Hall MP, Kaplan KM, Gorczynski CT, Zuckerman JD, Rosen JE: Assessment of arthroscopic training in U.S. orthopedic surgery residency programs--a resident self-assessment. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 2010, 68(1):5-10.
• [17]Insel A, Carofino B, Leger R, Arciero R, Mazzocca AD: The development of an objective model to assess arthroscopic performance. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009, 91(9):2287-2295.
• [18]O'Neill PJ, Cosgarea AJ, Freedman JA, Queale WS, McFarland EG: Arthroscopic proficiency: a survey of orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship directors and orthopaedic surgery department chairs. Arthroscopy 2002, 18(7):795-800.
• [19]Residency Review Committee: Orthopaedic Surgery Program Requirements 2007. Chicago, Illinois: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education; 2007.
• [20]Bergfeld JA: Issues with accreditation and certification of orthopedic surgery fellowships. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998, 80:1833-1836.
• [21]Omer GE: Certificates of added qualifications in orthopaedic surgery: A position in support of the certificates. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1994, 76:1599-1602.
• [22]Sarmiento A: Certificates of added qualification in orthopaedic surgery: A position against the certificates. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1994, 76:1603-1605.
• [23]Mabrey JD, Gillogly SD, Kasser JR, Sweeney HJ, Zarins B, Mevis H, Garrett WE Jr, Poss R, Cannon WD: Virtual reality simulation of arthroscopy of the knee. Arthroscopy 2002, 18:E28.
• [24]Vitale MA, Kleweno CP, Jacir AM, Levine WN, Bigliani LU, Ahmed CS: Training resources in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007, 89:1393-1398.
• [25]Adrales GL, Park AE, Chu UB, Witzke DB, Donnelly MB, Hoskins JD, Mastrangelo MJ Jr, Gandsas A: A valid method of laparoscopic simulation training and competence assessment. J Surg Res 2003, 114:156-162.
• [26]Fried GM, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC, Fraser SA, Stanbridge D, Ghitulescu G, Andrew CG: Proving the value of simulation in laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 2004, 240:518-528.
• [27]Brunner WC, Korndorffer JR Jr, Sierra R, Dunne JB, Yau CL, Corsetti RL, Slakey DP, Townsend MC, Scott DJ: Determining standards for laparoscopic proficiency using virtual reality. Am Surg 2005, 71:29-35.
• [28]Schijven M, Jakimowicz J: Construct validity: experts and novices performing on the Xitact LS500 laparoscopy simulator. Surg Endosc 2003, 17:803-810.
• [29]Dorafshar AH, O’Boyle DJ, McCloy RF: Effects of a moderate dose of alcohol on simulated laparoscopic surgical performance. Surg Endosc 2002, 16:1753-1758.
• [30]Ahlberg G, Heikkinen T, Iselius L, Leijonmarck CE, Rutqvist J, Arvidsson D: Does training in a virtual reality simulator improve surgical performance? Surg Endosc 2002, 16:126-129.
• [31]Gurusamy K, Aggarwal R, Palanivelu L, Davidson BR: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of virtual reality training for laparoscopic surgery. Br J Surg 2008, 95:1088-1097.
• [32]Tashiro Y, Miura H, Nakanishi Y, Okazaki K, Iwamoto Y: Evaluation of skills in arthroscopic training based on trajectory and force data. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009, 467:546-552.
• [33]Sherman KP, Ward JW, Wills DP, Sherman VJ, Mohsen AM: Surgical trainee assessment using a VE knee arthroscopy training system (VE-KATS): Experimental results. Stud Health Technol Inform 2001, 81:465-470.
• [34]Smith S, Wan A, Taffinder N, Read S, Emery R, Darzi A: Early experience and validation work with Procedicus VA—The Prosolvia virtual reality shoulder arthroscopy trainer. Stud Health Technol Inform 1999, 62:337-343.
• [35]Bliss JP, Hanner-Bailey HS, Scerbo MW: Determining the efficacy of an immersive trainer for arthroscopy skills. Stud Health Technol Inform 2005, 111:54-56.
• [36]Martin KD, Cameron K, Belmont PJ, Schoenfeld A, Owens BD: Shoulder arthroscopy simulator performance correlates with resident and shoulder arthroscopy experience. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012, 94(21):e160.
• [37]Howells NR, Brinsden MD, Gill RS, Carr AJ, Rees JL: Motion analysis: a validated method for showing skill levels in arthroscopy. Arthroscopy 2008, 24(3):335-342.
• [38]Chami G, Ward JW, Phillips R, Sherman KP: Haptic feedback can provide an objective assessment of arthroscopic skills. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008, 466(4):963-968. Epub 2008 Jan 23
• [39]Tuijthof G, Horeman T, Schafroth M, Blankevoort L, Kerkhoffs GMM: Probing forces of menisci: what levels are safe for arthroscopic surgery? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011, 19(2):248-254.
• [40]Alvand A, Khan T, Al-Ali S, Jackson WF, Price AJ, Rees JL: Simple visual parameters for objective assessment of arthroscopic skill. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012, 94(13):e97.
• [41]Rosen J, Hannaford B, MacFarlane MP, Sinanan MN: Force controlled and teleoperated endoscopic grasper for minimally invasive surgery: experimental performance evaluation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1999, 46:1212-1221.
• [42]Rosen J, Hannaford B, Richards CG, Sinanan MN: Markov modeling of minimally invasive surgery based on tool/tissue interaction and force/torque signatures for evaluating surgical skills. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2001, 48:579-591.
• [43]Darzi A, Smith S, Taffinder N: Assessing operative skill. Needs to become more objective. BMJ 1999, 318(7188):887-888.
• [44]Datta V, Mackay S, Mandalia M, Darzi A: The use of electromagnetic motion tracking analysis to objectively measure open surgical skill in the laboratory-based model. J Am Coll Surg 2001, 193:479-485.
• [45]Taffinder N, Smith S, Mair J, Russell R, Darzi A: Can a computer measure surgical precision? Reliability, validity and feasibility of ICSAD. Surg Endosc 1999, 13(suppl 1):81.
• [46]Sidhu RS, Grober ED, Musselman LJ, Reznick RK: Assessing competency in surgery: where to begin? Surgery 2004, 135:6-20.
• [47]Eubanks TR, Clements RH, Pohl D, Williams N, Schaad DC, Horgan S, Pellegrini C: An objective scoring system for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 1999, 189:566-574.
• [48]Larson JL, Williams RG, Ketchum J, Boehler ML, Dunnington GL: Feasibility, reliability and validity of an operative performance rating system for evaluating surgery residents. Surgery 2005, 138:640-647.
• [49]Sarker SK, Chang A, Vincent C: Technical and technological skills assessment in laparoscopic surgery. JSLS 2006, 10:284-292.
• [50]Bramson R, Sadoski M, Sanders CW, van Walsum K, Wiprud R: A reliable and valid instrument to assess competency in basic surgical skills in second-year medical students. South Med J 2007, 100:985-990.
• [51]Chou B, Bowen CW, Handa VL: Evaluating the competency of gynecology residents in the operating room: validation of a new assessment tool. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008, 199:571.e1-571.e5.
• [52]Doyle JD, Webber EM, Sidhu RS: A universal global rating scale for the evaluation of technical skills in the operating room. Am J Surg 2007, 193:551-555.
• [53]Martin JA, Regehr G, Reznick R, MacRae H, Murnaghan J, Hutchison C, Brown M: Objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) for surgical residents. Br J Surg 1997, 84:273-278.
• [54]van Hove PD, Tuijthof GJ, Verdaasdonk EG, Stassen LP, Dankelman J: Objective assessment of technical surgical skills. Br J Surg 2010, 97(7):972-987.
• [55]Orthopaedic Competence Assessment Project  http://www.ocap.rcsed.ac.uk/site/717/default.aspx webcite (date last accessed 16 Dec. 2011)
• [56]Elliott MJ, Caprise PA, Henning AE, Kurtz CA, Sekiya JK: Diagnostic knee arthroscopy: a pilot study to evaluate surgical skills. Arthroscopy 2012, 28(2):218-224.
• [57]Slade Shantz JA, Leiter JR, Collins JB, MacDonald PB: Validation of a global assessment of arthroscopic skills in a cadaveric knee model. Arthroscopy 2013, 29(1):106-112.
• [58]Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Project  http://www.iscp.ac.uk webcite (date last accessed 16 Dec. 2011)
• [59]Rineberg BA: Managing change during complex times. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1990, 72:799-800.
• [60]Arthroscopy Association of North America: Suggested guidelines for the practice of arthroscopic surgery. Rosemont, IL; 2011.
• [61]Morris AH, Jennings JE, Stone RG, Katz JA, Garroway RY, Hendler RC: Guidelines for privileges in arthroscopic surgery. Arthroscopy 1993, 9:125-127.
• [62]The American Board of Orthopedic SurgeryAvailable at https://www.abos.org/certification/sports-subspecialty.aspx webcite. Accessed on December 16, 2011
• [63]Leonard M, Kennedy J, Kiely P, Murphy PG: Knee arthroscopy: how much training is necessary? A cross-sectional study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2007, 17(4):359-362.
• [64]Leong JJ, Leff DR, Das A, Aggarwal R, Reilly P, Atkinson HD, Emery RJ, Darzi AW: Validation of orthopaedic bench models for trauma surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008, 90(7):958-965.
• [65]Andersen C, Winding TN, Vesterby MS: Development of simulated arthroscopic skills. Acta Orthop 2011, 82(1):90-95.
• [66]Slade Shantz JA, Leiter JR, Gottschalk T, Macdonald PB: The internal validity of arthroscopic simulators and their effectiveness in arthroscopic education. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012. Epub ahead of print
• [67]Jackson WF, Khan T, Alvand A, Al-Ali S, Gill HS, Price AJ, Rees JL: Learning and retaining simulated arthroscopic meniscal repair skills. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012, 94(17):e132.
• [68]Modi CS, Morris G, Mukherjee R: Computer-simulation training for knee and shoulder arthroscopic surgery. Arthroscopy 2010, 26(6):832-840.
• [69]Alvand A, Auplish S, Gill H, Rees J: Innate arthroscopic skills in medical students and variation in learning curves. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011, 93(19):e115(1-9).
• [70]Alvand A, Auplish S, Khan T, Gill HS, Rees JL: Identifying orthopaedic surgeons of the future: the inability of some medical students to achieve competence in basic arthroscopic tasks despite training: a randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011, 93(12):1586-1591.