Current provision of simulation in the UK and Republic of Ireland trauma and orthopaedic specialist training: a national survey.

Aims: The primary aim of the survey was to map the current provision of simulation training within UK and Republic of Ireland (RoI) trauma and orthopaedic (T&O) specialist training programmes to inform future design of a simulation based-curriculum. The secondary aims were to characterize; the types of simulation offered to trainees by stage of training, the sources of funding for simulation, the barriers to providing simulation in training, and to measure current research activity assessing the educational impact of simulation. Methods: The development of the survey was a collaborative effort between the authors and the British Orthopaedic Association Simulation Group. The survey items were embedded in the Performance and Opportunity Dashboard, which annually audits quality in training across several domains on behalf of the Speciality Advisory Committee (SAC). The survey was sent via email to the 30 training programme directors in March 2019. Data were retrieved and analyzed at the Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, UK. Results: Overall, 28 of 30 programme directors completed the survey (93%). 82% of programmes had access to high-fidelity simulation facilities such as cadaveric laboratories. More than half (54%) had access to a non-technical skills simulation training. Less than half (43%) received centralized funding for simulation, a third relied on local funding such as the departmental budget, and there was a heavy reliance on industry sponsorship to partly or wholly fund simulation training (64%). Provision was higher in the mid-stages (ST3-5) compared to late-stages (ST6-8) of training, and was formally timetabled in 68% of prostgrammes. There was no assessment of the impact of simulation training using objective behavioural measures or real-world clinical outcomes. Conclusion: There is currently widespread, but variable, provision of simulation in T&O training in the UK and RoI, which is likely to expand further with the new curriculum. It is important that research activity into the impact of simulation training continues, to develop an evidence base to support investment in facilities and provision

Key performance and training parameters in primary total hip arthroplasty – an expert consensus using the Delphi technique

Aims: Primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a commonly performed and successful operation which orthopaedic trainees must demonstrate competence in prior to completion of surgical training. An assessment of agreement between surgical trainers regarding the critical steps of a primary THA has never been undertaken. The aim of this study was to define and rank the key steps of a primary THA regards ease of teaching and their importance in achieving the best patient outcome. Materials and methods: The Delphi technique with 3 iterative rounds was used to establish expert group consensus. The benchmark for consensus was set at an 80% agreement in any category for each step of a THR. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to report on the inter- and intra-rater reliabilities between and within participants responses respectively in rounds 2 and 3. Results: 50 consultant orthopaedic hip surgeons completed round 2, and 28 completed round 3. Overall, 27 steps (54 parameters) were identified, with 16 parameters achieving consensus agreement for their impact on patient outcome, and 17 for ease of teaching. The inter-rater ICC for patient outcome parameters was 0.89 and 0.92 in rounds 2 and 3 respectively while for teaching parameters it was 0.82 and 0.73. 50% of surgeons agreed that acetabular reaming, assessing and accurately restoring leg length, and acetabular cup anteversion were the 3 most difficult steps to teach trainees, while 90% agreed these 3 steps were substantially important to patient outcome. Another 5 steps achieved consensus for their substantial impact on patient outcome but failed to achieve consensus for ease of teaching. Conclusions: The results of this expert consensus have produced a rank-order list of the key steps in primary THA, which may be used for orthopaedic curriculum development and guiding focused improvements for surgical training in primary THR including simulation

What is known about the attributes of a successful surgical trainer? A systematic review

Background Surgical training has been subject to significant upheaval in recent years with an increasingly rigorous assessment regimen for trainees. The assessment of surgical trainers is less well evolved by comparison. Recent proposals from the Royal College of Surgeons of England recommend “professionalising the trainers.” However, they do not suggest any accepted or validated methods of trainer assessment, nor do they indicate how these might be implemented and monitored in a real-world training program to determine their effect on trainee outcomes. Aim To determine what is known about the attributes of successful surgical trainers. Methods We conducted a systematic review of the scientific literature using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses and Cochrane guidelines of the Medline database using specific search criteria. The qualitative analysis involved grouping trainer attributes together into “themes” within 4 “super-themes.” Each theme needed to be mentioned by a minimum of 5 studies. Results After review of the full study texts a total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies involved the views of trainees, whereas only 1 study solely assessed the views of trainers. There was a wide variety of study designs and types of participants. The attribute themes are listed in brackets after each super-theme: “character” (approachability, patience, enthusiasm, encouraging/supportiveness), “procedural” (willingness to let trainee operate, balance between supervision and independence), “teamwork and communication” (sets educational aims and objectives, ability to use appropriate feedback, communication skills, and time availability to train) and “clinical” (capable, good relationships with patients, and the health care team). Conclusions This detailed review describes several perceived important themes for the positive attributes of surgical trainers. The identification of these key attributes is only of value if their presence is confirmed by effective and feasible evaluation, and if the possession of such attributes in trainers is proven to have a positive effect on training. In times of reduced training opportunities, exploring the topics raised by this review through future education research is warranted

Development of a surgical trainer assessment questionnaire.

Background The assessment of surgical trainees has become well-established in practice; however, this is not yet the case for surgical trainers. The aim of this study was to develop a trainer assessment questionnaire (OxTrAQ) based on the 12 key trainer attributes identified by a previous systematic review, to then explore this questionnaire’s potential domains and test its reliability. Methods The OxTrAQ was piloted at two surgical training centres in two surgical subspecialities. At each centre, every trainee assessed every trainer while under their clinical supervision. Results Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) was calculated for this 12-item questionnaire as 0.958. Factor analysis revealed two domains which accounted for 77.997% of the variance; these were the general domain (nine items) and the independence domain (three items). Inter-observer reliability was shown by the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) (average measures) for the overall OxTrAQ score, general domain score and independence domain score which were 0.951, 0.945 and 0.955 for centre 1 and 0.857, 0.819 and 0.883 for centre 2, respectively. Intra-observer reliability was shown by the ICCs (average measures) for the overall OxTrAQ score, general domain score and independence domain score which were 0.925, 0.913 and 0.940, respectively. Construct validity was demonstrated by a high correlation (Spearman rho = 0.886, P = 0.019) between trainer scores and the scores predicted by the trainers themselves. Conclusions The OxTrAQ is a simple trainer assessment questionnaire which has demonstrated both high inter- and intra-observer reliability.</p

What is known about the attributes of a successful surgical trainer? A systematic review

Background Surgical training has been subject to significant upheaval in recent years with an increasingly rigorous assessment regimen for trainees. The assessment of surgical trainers is less well evolved by comparison. Recent proposals from the Royal College of Surgeons of England recommend “professionalising the trainers.” However, they do not suggest any accepted or validated methods of trainer assessment, nor do they indicate how these might be implemented and monitored in a real-world training program to determine their effect on trainee outcomes. Aim To determine what is known about the attributes of successful surgical trainers. Methods We conducted a systematic review of the scientific literature using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses and Cochrane guidelines of the Medline database using specific search criteria. The qualitative analysis involved grouping trainer attributes together into “themes” within 4 “super-themes.” Each theme needed to be mentioned by a minimum of 5 studies. Results After review of the full study texts a total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies involved the views of trainees, whereas only 1 study solely assessed the views of trainers. There was a wide variety of study designs and types of participants. The attribute themes are listed in brackets after each super-theme: “character” (approachability, patience, enthusiasm, encouraging/supportiveness), “procedural” (willingness to let trainee operate, balance between supervision and independence), “teamwork and communication” (sets educational aims and objectives, ability to use appropriate feedback, communication skills, and time availability to train) and “clinical” (capable, good relationships with patients, and the health care team). Conclusions This detailed review describes several perceived important themes for the positive attributes of surgical trainers. The identification of these key attributes is only of value if their presence is confirmed by effective and feasible evaluation, and if the possession of such attributes in trainers is proven to have a positive effect on training. In times of reduced training opportunities, exploring the topics raised by this review through future education research is warranted

Development of a surgical trainer assessment questionnaire.

Background The assessment of surgical trainees has become well-established in practice; however, this is not yet the case for surgical trainers. The aim of this study was to develop a trainer assessment questionnaire (OxTrAQ) based on the 12 key trainer attributes identified by a previous systematic review, to then explore this questionnaire’s potential domains and test its reliability. Methods The OxTrAQ was piloted at two surgical training centres in two surgical subspecialities. At each centre, every trainee assessed every trainer while under their clinical supervision. Results Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) was calculated for this 12-item questionnaire as 0.958. Factor analysis revealed two domains which accounted for 77.997% of the variance; these were the general domain (nine items) and the independence domain (three items). Inter-observer reliability was shown by the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) (average measures) for the overall OxTrAQ score, general domain score and independence domain score which were 0.951, 0.945 and 0.955 for centre 1 and 0.857, 0.819 and 0.883 for centre 2, respectively. Intra-observer reliability was shown by the ICCs (average measures) for the overall OxTrAQ score, general domain score and independence domain score which were 0.925, 0.913 and 0.940, respectively. Construct validity was demonstrated by a high correlation (Spearman rho = 0.886, P = 0.019) between trainer scores and the scores predicted by the trainers themselves. Conclusions The OxTrAQ is a simple trainer assessment questionnaire which has demonstrated both high inter- and intra-observer reliability.</p

Objectively assessing intraoperative arthroscopic skills performance and the transfer of simulation training in knee arthroscopy: a randomised controlled trial

Purpose: Objectively investigate the transfer validity of simulation training, using wireless elbow-worn motion sensors intra-operatively to assess whether surgical simulation leads to improvements in intra-operative arthroscopic performance. Methods: Randomised controlled trial. PGY2-3 trainees in nationally-approved orthopaedic surgery posts were randomised to standard junior residency training (control group), or standard training plus additional weekly simulation training (intervention group). Both groups performed a supervised real-life diagnostic knee arthroscopy in the operating room at 13 weeks. Performance was measured using wireless elbow-worn motion sensors recording objective surgical performance metrics: the number of hand movements; smoothness; and time taken. A participant:supervisor performance ratio was used to adjust for variation in case-mix and difficulty. The study took place in a surgical simulation suite and orthopaedic operating rooms of a university teaching hospital. Results: The intervention group objectively outperformed the control group for all outcome metrics. Procedures performed by the intervention group required fewer hand movements (counts; 544[465-593] vs 893[747-1242], p<0.001), had smoother movements (ms-3; 25,842[20,867-27,468] vs 36,846[29,840-53,949], p<0.001) and took less time (seconds; 320[294-392] vs 573[477-860], p<0.001) than the control group. The cases were comparable between the groups. Standardised to the supervisors performance, the intervention group required fewer hand movements (1.9[1.5-2.1] vs 3.3[2.2-4.8], p=0.0091), less time (1.2[1.1-1.7] vs 2.6[1.6-3.0], p=0.0037) and were smoother (2.1[1.8-2.8] vs 4.3[2.8-5.4], p=0.0037) than the control group, but they didn’t perform as well as their supervisors

Simulation-based training platforms for arthroscopy: A randomized comparison of virtual reality learning to benchtop learning.

Purpose To determine whether a virtual reality (VR) arthroscopy simulator or benchtop (BT) arthroscopy simulator showed superiority as a training tool. Methods Arthroscopic novices were randomized to a training program on a BT or a VR knee arthroscopy simulator. The VR simulator provided user performance feedback. Individuals performed a diagnostic arthroscopy on both simulators before and after the training program. Performance was assessed using wireless objective motion analysis and a global rating scale. Results The groups (8 in the VR group, 9 in the BT group) were well matched at baseline across all parameters (P > .05). Training on each simulator resulted in significant performance improvements across all parameters (P .05). BT-trained subjects outperformed VR-trained subjects in all parameters during final assessments on the BT simulator (P .05). Conclusions Both simulators delivered improvements in arthroscopic skills. BT training led to skills that readily transferred to the VR simulator. Skills acquired after VR training did not transfer as readily to the BT simulator. Despite trainees receiving automated metric feedback from the VR simulator, the results suggest a greater gain in psychomotor skills for BT training. Further work is required to determine if this finding persists in the operating room. Clinical Relevance This study suggests that there are differences in skills acquired on different simulators and skills learnt on some simulators may be more transferable. Further work in identifying user feedback metrics that enhance learning is also required.</p

The urgent need for evidence in arthroscopic meniscal surgery: a systematic review of the evidence for operative management of meniscal tears

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic surgery of the knee is one of the most frequently performed orthopaedic procedures. One-third of these procedures are performed for meniscal injuries. It is essential that this commonly performed surgery be supported by robust evidence. PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of arthroscopic surgery for meniscal injuries in all populations. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: An online search was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews (SRs) that compared treatment options for meniscal injury. The following databases (inception to April 2015) were included in the search: CENTRAL; MEDLINE; EMBASE; NHS Evidence; National Guideline Clearing House, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment; ISRCTN; Clinicaltrials.gov; WHO trials platform. Only studies whose participants were selected on the basis of meniscal injury were included; no restrictions were placed on patient demographics. Two independent reviewers applied AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) criteria for SRs and the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool for RCTs. RESULTS: Nine RCTs and 8 SRs were included in the review. No difference was found between arthroscopic meniscal debridement compared with nonoperative management as a first-line treatment strategy for patients with knee pain and a degenerative meniscal tear (mean difference: Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, 1.6 [95% CI, -2.2 to 5.2], pain visual analog scale, -0.06 [95% CI, -0.28 to 0.15]). Some evidence was found to indicate that patients with resistant mechanical symptoms who initially fail nonoperative management may benefit from meniscal debridement No studies compared meniscal repair with meniscectomy or nonoperative management. Initial evidence suggested that meniscal transplant might be favorable in certain patient groups. CONCLUSION: Further evidence is required to determine which patient groups have good outcomes from each intervention. Given the current widespread use of arthroscopic meniscal surgeries, more research is urgently needed to support evidence-based practice in meniscal surgery in order to reduce the numbers of ineffective interventions and support potentially beneficial surgery

Validating the accuracy of a novel virtual reality platform for determining implant orientation in simulated primary total hip replacement

Objectives: To determine the validity of a novel virtual reality (VR) platform in assessing acetabular component orientation (inclination and version) in a simulated model. strong>Methods: An acetabular cup was manually implanted into a pelvis sawbone across a range of orientations. Simultaneous readings were obtained from the VR system and another validated system (Vicon®) for comparison. Results: 55 readings were obtained. The mean average difference in acetabular cup version and inclination between the Vicon and VR systems was 3.4°, and -0.005° respectively. Strong positive correlations were demonstrated in both version (Pearson’s R = 0.92, p Conclusion: The VR platform is highly accurate and reliable in determining acetabular component orientation in a simulated environment, which may be modified for use in a range of settings.</p