Technical Skills Assessment in a Coronary Angiography Simulator for Construct Validation.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate technical skills in a coronary angiography (CA) simulator to establish the performance level of trainees and experts in virtual CA.The traditional master-apprentice way of learning CA is by practicing on patients despite a known risk for complications during training. Safe CA training is warranted, and simulators might be one possibility. Simulators used must be validated regarding their ability to separate trainees from experts. Construct validation of a CA simulator, to our knowledge, has not yet been published. METHODS: Ten cardiology residents without experience in CA, 4 intermediate, and 10 CA experts performed 5 CAs in the Mentice VIST (Vascular Intervention Simulation Trainer). Metrics reflecting proficiency skills such as total procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume were extracted from the simulator computer and compared between the groups. All examinations were videotaped, and the number of handling errors was examined. The videos were evaluated by 2 experts blinded to the test object's performance level. RESULTS: Experts outperformed trainees in all metrics measured by the simulator. Improvement was demonstrated in all metrics through all 5 CAs. Furthermore, beginners had more handling errors compared with experts. CONCLUSIONS: Mentice VIST simulator can distinguish between trainees and experts in CA in the metrics extracted from the computer and therefore prove the concept of construct validity

The role of a simulator-based course in coronary angiography on performance in real life cath lab

Background: The aim of this study was to explore if a course consisting of lectures combined with simulator training in coronary angiography (CA) could accelerate the early learning curve when performing CA on patients. Knowledge in performing CA is included in the curriculum for the general cardiologist. The method, according to American College of Cardiology and European Society of Cardiology guidelines, for this training is not well defined but simulator training is proposed to be an option. However, the transfer effect from a CA simulator to performance in real world cath lab is not validated. Methods: Fifty-four residents without practical skills in CA completed the course and 12 continued to training in invasive cardiology. These residents were tracked in the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry and compared to a control group of 46 novel operators for evaluation of performance metrics. A total of 4472 CAs were analyzed. Results: Course participants demonstrated no consistent acceleration in the early learning curve in real world cath lab. They had longer fluoroscopy time compared to controls (median 360 seconds (IQR 245-557) vs. 289 seconds (IQR 179-468), p < 0.001). Safety measures also indicated more complications appearing at the ward, in particular when using the femoral approach (6.25% vs. 2.53%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Since the results of this retrospective non-randomized study were negative, the role of a structured course including simulator training for skills acquisition in CA is still uncertain. Randomized transfer studies are warranted to justify further use of simulators for training in C

The role of a simulator-based course in coronary angiography on performance in real life cath lab

Background: The aim of this study was to explore if a course consisting of lectures combined with simulator training in coronary angiography (CA) could accelerate the early learning curve when performing CA on patients. Knowledge in performing CA is included in the curriculum for the general cardiologist. The method, according to American College of Cardiology and European Society of Cardiology guidelines, for this training is not well defined but simulator training is proposed to be an option. However, the transfer effect from a CA simulator to performance in real world cath lab is not validated. Methods: Fifty-four residents without practical skills in CA completed the course and 12 continued to training in invasive cardiology. These residents were tracked in the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry and compared to a control group of 46 novel operators for evaluation of performance metrics. A total of 4472 CAs were analyzed. Results: Course participants demonstrated no consistent acceleration in the early learning curve in real world cath lab. They had longer fluoroscopy time compared to controls (median 360 seconds (IQR 245-557) vs. 289 seconds (IQR 179-468), p < 0.001). Safety measures also indicated more complications appearing at the ward, in particular when using the femoral approach (6.25% vs. 2.53%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Since the results of this retrospective non-randomized study were negative, the role of a structured course including simulator training for skills acquisition in CA is still uncertain. Randomized transfer studies are warranted to justify further use of simulators for training in C