Plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2018
Assessing Technical Performance and Determining the Learning Curve in Cleft Palate Surgery Using a High-Fidelity Cleft Palate Simulator.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеVideo-Audio MediaНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Podolsky Dale J, Fisher David M, Wong Riff Karen W, Szasz Peter, Looi Thomas, Drake James M, Forrest Christopher R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study assessed technical performance in cleft palate repair using a newly developed assessment tool and high-fidelity cleft palate simulator through a longitudinal simulation training exercise.
METHODS: Three residents performed five and one resident performed nine consecutive endoscopically recorded cleft palate repairs using a cleft palate simulator. Two fellows in pediatric plastic surgery and two expert cleft surgeons also performed recorded simulated repairs. The Cleft Palate Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill (CLOSATS) and end-product scales were developed to assess performance. Two blinded cleft surgeons assessed the recordings and the final repairs using the CLOSATS, end-product scale, and a previously developed global rating scale.
RESULTS: The average procedure-specific (CLOSATS), global rating, and end-product scores increased logarithmically after each successive simulation session for the residents. Reliability of the CLOSATS (average item intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), 0.85 ± 0.093) and global ratings (average item ICC, 0.91 ± 0.02) among the raters was high. Reliability of the end-product assessments was lower (average item ICC, 0.66 ± 0.15). Standard setting linear regression using an overall cutoff score of 7 of 10 corresponded to a pass score for the CLOSATS and the global score of 44 (maximum, 60) and 23 (maximum, 30), respectively. Using logarithmic best-fit curves, 6.3 simulation sessions are required to reach the minimum standard.
CONCLUSIONS: A high-fidelity cleft palate simulator has been developed that improves technical performance in cleft palate repair. The simulator and technical assessment scores can be used to determine performance before operating on patients.
METHODS: Three residents performed five and one resident performed nine consecutive endoscopically recorded cleft palate repairs using a cleft palate simulator. Two fellows in pediatric plastic surgery and two expert cleft surgeons also performed recorded simulated repairs. The Cleft Palate Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill (CLOSATS) and end-product scales were developed to assess performance. Two blinded cleft surgeons assessed the recordings and the final repairs using the CLOSATS, end-product scale, and a previously developed global rating scale.
RESULTS: The average procedure-specific (CLOSATS), global rating, and end-product scores increased logarithmically after each successive simulation session for the residents. Reliability of the CLOSATS (average item intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), 0.85 ± 0.093) and global ratings (average item ICC, 0.91 ± 0.02) among the raters was high. Reliability of the end-product assessments was lower (average item ICC, 0.66 ± 0.15). Standard setting linear regression using an overall cutoff score of 7 of 10 corresponded to a pass score for the CLOSATS and the global score of 44 (maximum, 60) and 23 (maximum, 30), respectively. Using logarithmic best-fit curves, 6.3 simulation sessions are required to reach the minimum standard.
CONCLUSIONS: A high-fidelity cleft palate simulator has been developed that improves technical performance in cleft palate repair. The simulator and technical assessment scores can be used to determine performance before operating on patients.