Determinants of accuracy of freehand external ventricular drain placement by neurosurgical trainees.

BACKGROUND: The external ventricular drain (EVD) placement is one of the most common neurosurgical procedures. This operation is performed by freehand technique in the majority of cases; therefore, the operator's experience plays an important role in success and possible morbidity of this procedure. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy and safety of EVD placement by junior neurosurgery residents and factors predicting accuracy of EVD placement. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study conducted at our academic medical center, between September 2017 and August 2018. All patients 18 years or older who required EVD placement were included. The accuracy and complications of EVD placement were assessed in the first and second year resident cohorts as well as by their level of experience, using descriptive statistics. Univariate and multivariate models were used to assess predictive factors for optimal EVD. RESULTS: A total of 100 EVDs were placed in 100 patients during the study period. According to Kakarla classification, the catheter was optimally placed in 80% of cases. The first year residents had a significantly higher rate of suboptimal burr hole placement compared to the second year residents (66.7% versus 27.1%, p = 0.004). The trainees with less than 10 EVD placement experience also had a significantly higher rate of suboptimal burr hole placement (55.2% vs. 23.9%, p = 0.003), significantly longer duration of operation (43.1 min ± 14.9SD vs 34.2 min ± 9.6 p = 0.005), and significantly lower rate of optimal EVD location (85.9% versus 65.5%, p = 0.023). Optimal location of the burr hole was the only significant predictor of optimal EVD placement in multivariate analysis (OR 11.9, 95% CI 3.2-44.6, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Neurosurgery residents experience and optimal burr hole placement are the main predicators of accurate EVD placement.

The evolution of an SBNS-accredited NANSIG simulated skills workshop for aspiring neurosurgical trainees: an analysis of qualitative and quantitative data.

BACKGROUND: The Neurology and Neurosurgery Interest Group (NANSIG) neurosurgical skills workshop is novel in teaching neurosurgical skills solely to medical students and foundation trainees in the UK. The aim is to offer an affordable option for a high-fidelity simulation course enabling students to learn and practise specific neurosurgical skills in a safe, supervised environment. METHODS: A 10-delegate cohort was quantitatively assessed at the NANSIG neurosurgical skills workshop. Two assessors used a novel modified Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (mOSATS) assessment tool, comprising 5 domains ranked according to a 5-point scale to rate delegates' ability to create a burr hole. Qualitative data from previous workshops were collected, consisting of open-ended, closed-ended and 5-point Likert scale responses to pre- and post-workshop questionnaires. Data were analysed using SPSS® software. RESULTS: Delegates scored a mean total of 62.1% (21.75/35) and 85.1% (29.8/35) in pre- and post-workshop assessments respectively revealing a statistically significant improvement. Regarding percentage of improvement, no significant difference was shown amongst candidates when comparing the number of neurosurgical cases observed and/or assisted in the past. There was no significant difference in the overall rating between the last two workshops (4.89 and 4.8 out of 5, respectively). One hundred percent of the attendees reported feeling more confident in assisting in theatre after the last two workshops. CONCLUSION: We show that a simulation workshop cannot only objectively quantify the improvement of surgical skill acquisition but can also be beneficial regardless of the extent of prior experience.

Burr hole trepanation for chronic subdural hematomas: is surgical education safe?

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data concerning the safety and efficacy of surgical education for neurosurgical residents in the evacuation of chronic subdural hematomas (cSDH) by burr hole trepanation. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on consecutive patients receiving burr hole trepanation for uni- or bilateral cSDH. Patients operated by a supervised neurosurgery resident (teaching cases) were compared to patients operated by a board-certified faculty neurosurgeon (BCFN; non-teaching cases). The primary endpoint was surgical revision for any reason until the last follow-up. The secondary endpoint was occurrence of any complication until the last follow-up. Clinical status, type of complications, mortality, length of surgery (LOS), and hospitalization (LOH) were tertiary endpoints. RESULTS: A total of n = 253 cases were analyzed, of which n = 217 (85.8%) were teaching and n = 36 (14.2%) non-teaching cases. The study groups were balanced in terms of age, sex, surgical risk (ASA score), and preoperative status (Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS), modified Rankin Scale (mRS), National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS)). The cohort was followed for a mean of 242 days (standard deviation 302). In multivariate analysis, teaching cases were as likely as non-teaching cases to require revision surgery (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.27-1.59; p = 0.348) as well as to experience any complication until the last follow-up (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.37-1.67; p = 0.532). Mean LOS was about 10 min longer in teaching cases (53.0 ± 26.1 min vs. 43.5 ± 17.8 min; p = 0.036), but LOH was similar. There were no group differences in clinical status, mortality and type of complication at discharge, and the last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Burr hole trepanation for cSDH can be safely performed by supervised neurosurgical residents enrolled in a structured training program, without increasing the risk for revision surgery, perioperative complications, or worse outcome.

Burr-Hole Craniostomy for Chronic Subdural Hematomas by General Surgeons in Rural Kenya.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH) is a common condition that causes significant morbidity and mortality. In rural sub-Saharan Africa, there are very few neurosurgeons. Yet, cSDH is treatable by relatively simple surgical intervention with potential for rapid clinical improvement. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients with cSDH who underwent burr-hole trephination at Tenwek Hospital, Kenya, between July 2014 and July 2016. We extracted and compared the clinical presentation, risk factors, operative details, and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 119 patients were identified with a mean age of 61.3 years. The majority were men (80%). The main predisposing factors were trauma (54.6%) and alcohol intake (34.4%). Patients were generally managed with two burr-holes, irrigation, and a subdural drain, remaining for a median of 2 days. Operations were assisted by general surgery residents under direct supervision of senior residents (46), general surgeons (65), and neurosurgeons (8). Complications included recurrence (5.2%), subdural empyema (2.5%), postoperative seizures (3.4%), and mortality (6.7%). Improvement of symptoms was noted in 91% of all patients. CONCLUSION: Operative management of cSDH can be safely performed in rural facilities by general surgeons familiar with the procedure and with the institutional resources. The majority of patients had satisfactory outcomes.

Objective assessment of temporal bone drilling skills.

OBJECTIVES: There is great interest in training surgeons in the technical aspects of their craft through simulation and laboratory-based exercises. However, there are as yet only a few objective tools to assess technical performance in a laboratory setting. This study assesses three potential objective assessment tools for a traditional otolaryngology laboratory exercise, temporal bone drilling. METHODS: We performed a validation study in an academic training program. Nineteen otolaryngology residents performed a cortical mastoidectomy on a cadaveric temporal bone. The participants were divided into two groups, experienced and novice, based on previous temporal bone drilling experience. Performance was rated by two independent, blinded experts using four different assessments, the Global Rating Scale (GRS), the Task-Based Checklist (TBC), the final product analysis (FPA), and expert opinion (EO). RESULTS: The interrater reliability for all four assessments was good. Two potential objective assessments, the GRS and the TBC, and the traditional assessment tool of EO, correlated with trainee experience. The FPA, however, did not correlate with trainee experience. A logistic regression analysis of all assessments showed that the TBC correlates with EO. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates EO, the GRS, and the TBC as measures of temporal bone drilling performance. Of these measures, the TBC correlates best with EO according to logistic regression and can be reliably used as an objective assessment of temporal bone drilling.

Drilling simulated temporal bones with left-handed tools: a left-hander's right?

OBJECTIVES: Left-handed trainees can be at a disadvantage in the surgical environment because of a right-handed bias. The effectiveness of teaching left-handed trainees to use an otologic drill designed for their dominant hand versus the conventional right-handed drill was examined. METHODS: Novice medical students were recruited from the university community. Twenty-four subjects were left-handed, and 12 were right-handed. Eight left-handed surgeons also participated. A randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the performance of left-handed trainees using novel left-handed drills to that of left-handed trainees using right-handed tools and to that of right-handed trainees using right-handed tools. The evaluation consisted of 3 phases: pretest, skill acquisition, and 2 post-tests. The measurement tools included expert assessment of performance, and subjective and objective final product analyses. RESULTS: An initial construct validity phase was conducted in which validity of the assessment tools was ensured. Both the left-handers using left-handed tools and the right-handers using right-handed tools significantly outperformed the left-handers using right-handed tools at pretest, immediate posttest, and delayed posttest. All participants improved their performance as a function of practice. CONCLUSIONS: The left-handed trainees learned bone drilling better with tools designed for the left hand. These tools may be incorporated into residency training programs for the development of surgical technical skills. Future studies should assess skill transfer between the left-handed and right-handed drills.