Advertisement

Validation of 2 Novel and Complementary Training Platforms for Small Joint Arthroscopy

      Purpose

      We developed 2 complementary low-fidelity models to be used to create the tool skills needed to perform small joint arthroscopy. The purpose of the study was to establish the face and construct validity of the 2 models.

      Methods

      The “foundation model” was constructed from lemon and radish sections, and the advanced model” was constructed from a chicken knee. Using both models, novice, intermediate, and experienced participants were asked to perform specific tasks and were timed and scored on their performance. The experienced surgeons were given a 16-item survey to rate how closely each model emulated reality to determine face validity.

      Results

      For the foundation model, the mean total time for the completion of tasks was 1,138 seconds for novices, 1,059 seconds for intermediates, and 631 seconds for experienced, with significant differences between the groups for time to complete 2 of the tasks. With a maximum possible score of 50 points for the correct performance of all tasks, the mean total performance score was 23 for novices, 31.8 for intermediates, and 42.2 for experienced operators. For the advanced model, the mean total time for completion was 266 seconds for novices, 147 seconds for intermediates, and 72 seconds for experienced participants. With a maximum possible score of 31 points for the correct performance of all tasks, the mean total performance score was 1.9 for novices, 15.0 for intermediates, and 24.3 for experienced participants. The average scores for the face validity surveys using a 5-point Likert scale were 4.2 and 4.5 of 5 possible points for the foundation and advanced models, respectively.

      Conclusions

      Experienced operators completed the tasks more quickly and had higher performance scores than the operators in other groups. This correlation between experience and performance suggests that both models have construct validity. The face validity scores were on the upper end of the scale, suggesting that both models emulate reality for experienced operators.

      Clinical relevance

      These novel models provide low-cost, available and valid simulations conducive to high-repetition training.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Hand Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Honnenahalli Chandrappa M.
        • Hajibandeh S.
        • Hajibandeh S.
        Ankle arthrodesis-open versus arthroscopic: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2017; 8: S71-S77
        • Sammer D.M.
        • Shin A.Y.
        Comparison of arthroscopic and open treatment of septic arthritis of the wrist. Surgical technique.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010; 92: 107-113
        • Slutsky D.J.
        Current innovations in wrist arthroscopy.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2012; 37: 1932-1941
        • Vega J.
        • Dalmau-Pastor M.
        • Malagelada F.
        • Fargues-Polo B.
        • Peña F.
        Ankle arthroscopy: an update.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017; 99: 1395-1407
        • Gil J.A.
        • Waryasz G.R.
        • Owens B.D.
        • Daniels A.H.
        Variability of arthroscopy case volume in orthopaedic surgery residency.
        Arthroscopy. 2016; 32: 892-897
        • Calvert N.
        • Grainger N.
        • Hurworth M.
        Use of bovine carpal joints as a training model for cruciate ligament repair.
        ANZ J Surg. 2013; 83: 933-936
        • Arealis G.
        • Holton J.
        • Rodrigues J.B.
        • et al.
        How to build your simple and cost-effective arthroscopic skills simulator.
        Arthrosc Tech. 2016; 5: e1039-e1047
        • Martin R.K.
        • Gillis D.
        • Leiter J.
        • Shantz J.S.
        • MacDonald P.
        A porcine knee model is valid for use in the evaluation of arthroscopic skills: a pilot study.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016; 474: 965-970
        • Kovac N.
        • Grainger N.
        • Hurworth M.
        Training models for meniscal repairs and small joint arthroscopy.
        ANZ J Surg. 2015; 85: 649-651
        • Wright D.J.
        • Uong J.
        • ASSH Surgical Simulation Taskforce
        Establishing validity of a comprehensive hand Surgical Training and Educational Platform (STEP).
        J Hand Surg Am. 2020; 45: 1105-1114
        • Chan W.Y.
        • Matteucci P.
        • Southern S.J.
        Validation of microsurgical models in microsurgery training and competence: a review.
        Microsurgery. 2007; 27: 494-499
        • Mohammad S.
        • Hanstein R.
        • Lo Y.
        • Levy I.M.
        Validating a low-fidelity model for microsurgical anastomosis training.
        JB JS Open Access. 2021; 6e20.00148