Trauma and Orthopedic Surgery Curriculum Concordance: An Operative Learning Curve Trajectory Perspective

The number of arthroscopies performed by trainees does not deduce the level of their arthroscopic proficiency

PURPOSE

It is reasonable to question whether the case volume is a suitable proxy for the manual competence of an arthroscopic surgeon. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the number of arthroscopies previously performed and the arthroscopic skills acquired using a standardized simulator test.

METHODS

A total of 97 resident and early orthopaedic surgeons who participated in arthroscopic simulator training courses were divided into five groups based on their self-reported number of arthroscopic surgeries: (1) none, (2) < 10, (3) 10 to 19, (4) 20 to 39 and (5) 40 to 100. Arthroscopic manual skills were evaluated with a simulator by means of the diagnostic arthroscopy skill score (DASS) before and after training. Seventy-five points out of 100 must be achieved to pass the test.

RESULTS

In the pretest, only three trainees in group 5 passed the arthroscopic skill test, and all other participants failed. Group 5 (57 ± 17 points; n = 17) scored significantly higher than the other groups (group 1: 30 ± 14, n = 20; group 2: 35 ± 14, n = 24; group 3: 35 ± 18, n = 23; and group 4: 33 ± 17, n = 13). After a two-day simulator training, trainees showed a significant increase in performance. In group 5, participants scored 81 ± 17 points, which was significantly higher than the other groups (group 1: 75 ± 16; group 2: 75 ± 14; group 3: 69 ± 15; and group 4: 73 ± 13). While self-reported arthroscopic procedures were n.s. associated with higher log odds of passing the test (p = 0.423), the points scored in the pretest were found to be a good predictor of whether a trainee would pass the test (p < 0.05). A positive correlation was observed between the points scored in the pretest and the posttest (p < 0.05, r = 0.59, r2 = 0.34).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of previously performed arthroscopies is not a reliable indicator of the skills level of orthopaedic residents. A reasonable alternative in the future would be to verify arthroscopic proficiency on the simulator by means of a score as a pass-fail examination.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Early Evaluation of a New French Surgery Course in the Best Practice of Dealing With Major Incidents and Mass Casualty Events

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of a nationwide 5-month course aimed to prepare surgeons for Major Incidents through the acquisition of key knowledge and competencies. Learners' satisfaction was also measured as a secondary objective.

DESIGN

This course was evaluated thanks to various teaching efficacy metrics, mainly based on Kirkpatrick's hierarchy in medical education. Gain in knowledge of participants was evaluated by multiple-choice tests. Self-reported confidence was measured with 2 detailed pre and post training questionnaires.

SETTING

Creation in 2020 of a nationwide, optional and comprehensive Surgical Training in War and Disaster Situation as part of the French surgery residency program. In 2021, data was gathered regarding the impact of the course on participants' knowledge and competencies.

PARTICIPANTS

The study included 26 students in the 2021 cohort (13 residents and 13 practitioners).

RESULTS

Mean scores were significantly higher in the post-test compared to the pre-test, showing significant increase in participants' knowledge during the course: 73,3% vs. 47,3% respectively (p ≤ 0.001). Average learners' confidence scores to perform technical procedures showed at least a +1-point increase on the Likert scale for 65% of items tested (p ≤ 0.001). 89% of items showed at least a +1-point increase on the Likert scale when it came to average learners' confidence score on dealing with complicated situations (p ≤ 0.001). Our post-training satisfaction survey showed that 92% of all participants have noticed the impact of the course on their daily practice.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that the third level of Kirkpatrick's hierarchy in medical education was reached. This course therefore appears to be meeting the objectives set by the Ministry of Health. Being only 2 years old, it is on the road to gathering momentum and further development.

Learning and Short-Term Retention of Simulation-Based Arthroscopic Skills

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to examine the learning curve and short-term retention of arthroscopic skills acquired on a simulator.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING

Clinical Skills Training Center of Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University PARTICIPANT AND METHODS: Orthopaedic residents (n = 14) without previous arthroscopy experience were included. After basic information was collected and an initial arthroscopy knowledge level test was administered, the subjects received standardised training on the simulator (day 1); then, they completed tasks on the simulator, including guided diagnostics (4 times), triangulation (5 times) and loose body removal (7 times). A learning curve for each skill was generated based on the total scores. The score of the last repetition of each task was the training level.

RESULTS

A total of 14 orthopedic residents were enrolled. All participants completed the training and testing. There was a learning curve over the course of training for all 3 arthroscopic skills (p < 0.001). On day 8 after the training, the mean score for guided diagnostics decreased from 49.9 to 48.9 (p = 0.001), and the retention rate was 97.8%. For triangulation, the mean total score decreased from 58.9 to 53.6 (p < 0.001), and the retention rate was 90.8%. For loose body removal, the mean total score decreased from 87.1 to 80.7 (p < 0.001), and the retention rate was 92.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Orthopaedic residents' arthroscopic skills learned through simulator training declined significantly in 1 week after the training, especially more difficult skills.

Defining operative experience targets in surgical training: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The surgical learning curve is an observable and measurable phenomenon. Operative experience targets are well established as a proxy measure for operative competence in surgical training across jurisdictions. The aim of this study was to critique the available evidence regarding the relationship between operative experience in surgical training and trainee competence.

METHODS

A systematic review of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Articles were sought that defined the relationship between procedural volume in surgical training and trainee competence, proficiency, or mastery. The educational impact of included studies was evaluated using a modified Kirkpatrick model.

RESULTS

Of 3,672 records identified on database searching, 30 papers were ultimately included. Fourteen studies defined operative experience thresholds using operative time as a surrogate measure of competence, whereas another 8 used trainer assessments of operative performance (Kirkpatrick level 3). A further 5 studies were able to determine the relationship between trainee case volumes and subsequent patient outcomes (Kirkpatrick level 4b).

CONCLUSION

Many studies have recorded competent trainee performance in key index procedures after reaching experience threshold numbers in excess of currently mandated targets across jurisdictions. The evidence relating current operative experience targets to patient outcomes across a range of surgical subspecialties of surgical subspecialties is lacking. This review supports a move toward criterion-based referencing of operative performance targets in surgical training.

Assessing Operative Skill in the Competency-based Education Era: Lessons From the UK and Ireland

INTRODUCTION

Decisions regarding the operative competence of surgical residents in the United Kingdom and Ireland are informed by operative workplace-based assessments (WBAs) and operative number targets for index procedures. This review seeks to outline the validity evidence of these assessment methods.

METHODS

A review of the MEDLINE (Pubmed), EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases was undertaken in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute Protocol for Scoping Reviews (2020). Articles were included if they provided evidence of the validity of procedure-based assessments, direct observation of procedural skills, or indicative operative number targets. The educational impact of each article was evaluated using a modified Kirkpatrick model.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight articles outlining validity evidence of WBAs and operative number targets were synthesised by narrative review. Five studies documented users' views on current assessment methods (Kirkpatrick level 1). Two articles recorded changes in attitudes towards current operative assessments (level 2a). Ten studies documented the ability of current assessments to record improvements in operative competence (level 2b). Ten studies measured a change in behaviour as a result of the introduction of these assessments (level 3). One article studied the ability of operative assessments to predict clinical outcomes (level 4b).

CONCLUSIONS

Operative WBAs are reliable. Scores achieved correlate with both time spent in training and recorded operative experience. Trainers and residents have concerns regarding the subjectivity of these assessments and the opportunistic nature in which they are used. Operative number targets are not criterion-referenced, lack validity evidence, and may be set too low to ensure operative competence.

Contemporary Issues in the Acquisition of Orthopaedic Surgical Skills During Residency: Competency-Based Medical Education and Simulation

➤

Orthopaedic education should produce surgeons who are competent to function independently and can obtain and maintain board certification.

➤

Contemporary orthopaedic training programs exist within a fixed 5-year time frame, which may not be a perfect match for each trainee.

➤

Most modern orthopaedic residencies have not yet fully adopted objective, proficiency-based, surgical skill training methods despite nearly 2 decades of evidence supporting the use of this methodology.

➤

Competency-based medical education backed by surgical simulation rooted in proficiency-based progression has the potential to address surgical skill acquisition challenges in orthopaedic surgery.

What it takes to become an orthopaedic surgeon: A comparison of orthopaedic surgical training programmes in 10 countries focusing on structure and fellowship requirements

BACKGROUND

The quality of surgical training has been highlighted as one of the most important patient safety issues in the future. Training surgeons and supporting them to do their best should be considered integral in providing optimum and safe care for the individual patient and the best possible return on investment in training medical professionals. In 2011, an international consensus statement defined fundamental principles for surgical training.

PURPOSE

This study examines orthopaedic surgical training to explore the similarities and differences in the requirements for trainees to obtain board certification in ten countries.

METHODS

Countries of the Commonwealth Health Care Comparison: Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Norway and Switzerland were chosen to be compared. The relevant information was extracted from official information from authorities and administrative bodies.

RESULTS

The study revealed significant differences in duration, organisation and assessment of training. So-called "competency-based" training is not featured in every country, and the manner of its implementation is variable. In particular, the numbers in surgical cases required to be accredited varies by country ranging from 1260 (UK) to 340 (Norway).

CONCLUSION

Despite the recommendation in 2011 for some degree of uniformity across surgical training in industrialised countries, evidence suggests wide variation in the training programmes which is likely to be a concern in both quality of training as well as present and future patient safety.

An international comparison of competency-based orthopaedic curricula and minimum operative experience - Review article

INTRODUCTION

Orthopaedic training has undergone considerable changes in the last few decades. Although structured training pathways exist in most countries, the requirements for completion of training are remarkably different. This review aims to assess key differences among orthopaedic curricula in selected high-income countries with well-established orthopaedic training programmes, focusing on their criteria for assessing technical competence prior to completion of training.

METHODS

Current orthopaedic training curricula published by the relevant accrediting bodies in the UK, USA, Canada, Australia, Germany and the European Union were reviewed. Data extracted included specified training duration, minimum or desirable operative experience requirements, methods and timing of in-training assessments.

RESULTS

The overall training duration ranged between 9 and 10 years in the UK and Australia, compared to 5-6 years in all other countries. While operative logbook was an essential component of formative and end-of-training reviews in all countries, minimum indicative numbers in index operations were a requirement only in the UK (minimum total required; 1800, index operations; 365) and USA (minimum total required; 1000, index operations; 455). On average, USA residents performed 1700 procedures compared to German residents performing 730 procedures before completion of training.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of robust data describing the operative experiences of orthopaedic trainees outside of the UK and USA. UK training is the longest among countries compared in this review and also sets the highest standards in minimum operative experience requirements. Based on the evidence available, surgeons exiting training and entering independent practice in the above countries are not trained to the same minimum standard.