Large Heterogeneity Among Minimal Clinically Important Differences for Hip Arthroscopy Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Reporting Trends and Quantification Methods.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review of reporting trends and quantification methods for the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) within the hip arthroscopy literature. METHODS: Cochrane, PubMed, and OVID/MEDLINE databases were queried for hip arthroscopy articles that reported the MCID. Studies were classified as (1) calculating new MCID values for their specific study-population or (2) referencing previously established MCID values. Data pertaining to patient demographics, study characteristics, outcome measures, method of MCID quantification, MCID value, anchor questions, measurement error, and study from which referenced MCID values were obtained were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 59 articles with 18,830 patients (19,867 hips) was included. A total of 19 unique outcome measures was reported. A total of 33 (n = 55.9%) studies (follow-up range 6-60 months) used previously established MCID values to assess their study population (MCID values established at a follow-up range 6-31 months). The remaining 26 studies (44.1%) performed new MCID calculations. The MCID values were inconsistent and varied widely (Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living: 5.0-15.4; Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale: 6-25; modified Harris hip score: 2.4-20.9). Among the 33 studies that used previously established MCID values, 10 different studies were cited as the reference. Among the remaining 26 studies that calculated a new MCID value, the most common method was 0.5 standard deviation method (n = 21, 80.8%). Only 3 of 26 (11.5%) studies reported a measurement of error in conjunction with their MCID values. CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistencies in MCID reporting and quantification methods led to a wide range of MCID values for commonly administered outcome measures within the hip arthroscopy literature-even for the same outcome measures. The majority of studies referenced previously established MCID values with variable ranges of follow-up and applied those values to assess their specific study population at varying follow-ups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, systematic review.

Accuracy of Currently Available Methods in Quantifying Anterior Glenoid Bone Loss: Controversy Regarding Gold Standard-A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To determine the accuracy of glenoid bone loss-measuring methods and assess the influence of the imaging modality on the accuracy of the measurement methods. METHODS: A literature search was performed in the PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, and Cochrane databases from 1994 to June 11, 2019. The guidelines and algorithm of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) were used. Included for analysis were articles reporting the accuracy of glenoid bone loss-measuring methods in patients with anterior shoulder instability by comparing an index test and a reference test. Furthermore, articles were included if anterior glenoid bone loss was quantified using a ruler during arthroscopy or by measurements on plain radiograph(s), computed tomography (CT) images, or magnetic resonance images in living humans. The risk of bias was determined using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were included, showing 17 different methods. Three studies reported on the accuracy of methods performed on 3-dimensional CT. Two studies determined the accuracy of glenoid bone loss-measuring methods performed on radiography by comparing them with methods performed on 3-dimensional CT. Six studies determined the accuracy of methods performed using imaging modalities with an arthroscopic method as the reference. Eight studies reported on the influence of the imaging modality on the accuracy of the methods. There was no consensus regarding the gold standard. Because of the heterogeneity of the data, a quantitative analysis was not feasible. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus regarding the gold standard in measuring glenoid bone loss is lacking. The use of heterogeneous data and varying methods contributes to differences in the gold standard, and accuracy therefore cannot be determined. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II, III, and IV studies.

Indications for Arthroscopic Subacromial Decompression. A Level V Evidence Clinical Guideline.

Since the introduction of acromioplasty by Neer in 1971 and arthroscopic subacromial decompression (SAD) by Ellman in 1987, the outcomes have been reported to be consistently good. Recently it was suggested that supervised physical therapy is comparable with SAD, which was contested by other studies claiming that SAD is clearly superior to nonoperative treatment. Before consideration for treatment, the diagnosis of impingement with an intact rotator cuff must be determined by clinical history, a detailed and structured clinical examination, and appropriate imaging. In favor of SAD are published long-term studies with a minimum of 10 years outlining significant functional and clinical improvement. The main factor for failure reported was workers compensation, calcific tendinopathy, and high-grade partial-thickness tears. Studies nonsupportive of SAD suffer from bias, crossover from the nonoperative group to the operative group following failure of conservative treatment, and loss of follow-up. Recently, lateral acromion resection has been suggested as a viable alternative, effectively reducing the critical shoulder angle. Following nonoperative treatment for at least 6 weeks, SAD is a viable and good surgical option for the treatment of shoulder impingement with an intact rotator cuff. Care should be taken to avoid resection of the acromioclavicular ligament. Five millimeters of lateral acromion resection is the recommended amount of resection. Patients with chronic calcific tendinitis, workers compensation, and partial-thickness tears should not be treated by SAD alone.

Procedure length is independently associated with overnight hospital stay and 30-day readmission following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

PURPOSE: The purpose was to characterize the independent effect of procedure length on the rates of 30-day perioperative complications, hospital readmissions, and overnight hospital stay in patients undergoing arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). We hypothesized that longer procedure length in primary ACLR increases the risk for post-operative complications. METHODS: Primary ACLR cases from 2005 to 2015 were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry. Patients were categorized into two cohorts based on procedure length, either less than or greater than 90 min. Two equal-sized propensity-matched cohorts were generated to account for differences in baseline and operative characteristics. Thirty-day clinical outcomes were compared using bivariate analyses between propensity-matched groups that controlled for patient-specific factors and concurrent meniscal repair. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify independent predictors of hospital readmission and overnight hospital stay. RESULTS: In total, 12,077 ACLR cases were identified. The rate of any 30-day complication was increased in longer procedures relative to shorter procedures (1.6% vs 0.9%, p = 0.006), as were the rates of returning to the operating room (0.6% vs 0.3%, p = 0.03), hospital readmission (1.0% vs 0.3%, p = 0.001), and overnight hospital stay (16.2% vs 6.0%, p < 0.001). Obesity was a risk factor for both hospital readmission and overnight hospital stay, while hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and a smoking history were associated with increased rates of overnight hospital stay. The most common reasons for hospital readmission were deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism (25.0% of all readmitted patients), surgical site infection (25.0%), and post-operative pain (14.1%). CONCLUSIONS: In this propensity-matched analysis adjusting for baseline patient characteristics and operative factors, procedure length of greater than or equal to 90 min in ACLR was independently associated with an increased risk of hospital readmission and overnight hospital stay. As a surrogate measure of surgical complexity, operative time may be a useful perioperative variable for post-operative risk stratification and patient counseling. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Diagnostic needle arthroscopy of the tarsocrural joint in standing sedated horses.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and assess a needle arthroscopic technique to diagnose conditions of the tarsocrural joint (TCj) in standing sedated horses. STUDY DESIGN: Experimental study. SAMPLE POPULATION: Six cadaveric hind limbs (phase 1) and six healthy horses (Phase 2). METHODS: In phase 1, each TCj was examined with a 1.2-mm-needle arthroscope. Suitability of the needle arthroscope and degree of joint visualization with traditional arthroscopic approaches were assessed. In phase 2, the feasibility of the procedure was assessed in six standing healthy horses. A custom-made splint and base were developed to maintain joint flexion during the procedure. RESULTS: Thorough evaluation of the dorsal intra-articular structures of the TCj via dorsomedial and dorsolateral approaches was possible in both phases. The procedure was feasible, quickly performed, and well tolerated by all horses. Complications consisted of moderate movement (2/6 horses) and hemarthrosis (3/6 horses). CONCLUSION: Diagnostic standing needle arthroscopy of the TCj allowed thorough evaluation of the dorsal aspect of the joint while avoiding the cost and risks associated with general anesthesia. Inadvertent puncture of the dorsomedial vasculature with the cannula and obturator led to significant hemarthrosis. CLINICAL IMPACT: Needle arthroscopy of the TCj offers an alternative diagnostic tool when traditional imaging techniques (radiography and ultrasonography) are unrewarding or nondiagnostic. The technique is conceived mainly for diagnostic purposes, but its use during short interventions warrants investigation.

Evaluation of the caudal cervical articular process joints by using a needle arthroscope in standing horses.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of caudal cervical articular process joint arthroscopy by using needle arthroscopy in standing sedated horses. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective experimental case series. ANIMALS: Six adult horses. METHODS: Three horses underwent exploration of bilateral C5-6 vertebral articular process joints and three bilateral C6-7 articular process joints by using a 1.2 × 65-mm needle arthroscope under standing sedation. The 16-gauge arthroscopic trocar and canula assembly was inserted in the desired articular process joint under ultrasonographic guidance without distention of the joint. RESULTS: All 12 articular process joints were successfully explored. Entering the joint on the first attempt was achieved in 10 of 12 joints. A craniodorsal approach for arthroscope insertion allowed evaluation of the most cranial aspect of the articular cartilage surface. Triangulation with a spinal needle was determined to be difficult and resulted in a limited space for movement. CONCLUSION: Needle arthroscopy of the caudal cervical facet joints was performed safely and efficiently in standing sedated horses. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Standing cervical articular process needle arthroscopy is a minimal morbidity technique with the potential to be an advantageous technique for the diagnosis and treatment of cervical articular process pathology.

Room Temperature Versus Warm Irrigation Fluid Used for Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to analyze whether warm irrigation fluid could reduce postoperative adverse effects in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery compared with room temperature irrigation fluid. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials was performed. METHODS: A computerized search of electronic databases was performed. The inclusion criteria were studies comparing the clinical effects of room temperature and warm irrigation fluid on patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery. FINDINGS: Warm irrigation fluid reduced the degree of core body temperature drop and the incidence of hypothermia. A statistically lower incidence of shivering also occurred in the warm irrigation fluid group. CONCLUSIONS: The use of warm irrigation fluid better maintains core body temperature and reduces incidence of shivering than room temperature irrigation fluid. Therefore, warm irrigation fluid is a better choice for arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

Superior Trunk Block Provides Noninferior Analgesia Compared with Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block in Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Interscalene brachial plexus block of the C5-C6 roots provides highly effective postoperative analgesia after shoulder surgery but usually results in hemidiaphragmatic paresis. Injection around the superior trunk of the brachial plexus is an alternative technique that may reduce this risk. The authors hypothesized that the superior trunk block would provide noninferior postoperative analgesia compared with the interscalene block and reduce hemidiaphragmatic paresis. METHODS: Eighty patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery were randomized to receive a preoperative injection of 15 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine and 5 µg · ml epinephrine around either (1) the C5-C6 nerve roots (interscalene block group) or (2) the superior trunk (superior trunk block group). The primary outcome was pain intensity 24 h after surgery measured on an 11-point numerical rating score; the prespecified noninferiority limit was 1. Diaphragmatic function was assessed using both ultrasonographic measurement of excursion and incentive spirometry by a blinded investigator before and 30 min after block completion. RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients completed the study. The pain score 24 h postoperatively (means ± SDs) was 1.4 ± 1.0 versus 1.2 ± 1.0 in the superior trunk block (n = 38) and interscalene block (n = 40) groups, respectively. The mean difference in pain scores was 0.1 (95% CI, -0.3 to 0.6), and the upper limit of the 95% CI was lower than the prespecified noninferiority limit. Analgesic requirements and all other pain measurements were similar between groups. Hemidiaphragmatic paresis was observed in 97.5% of the interscalene block group versus 76.3% of the superior trunk block group (P = 0.006); paresis was complete in 72.5% versus 5.3% of the patients, respectively. The decrease in spirometry values from baseline was significantly greater in the interscalene block group. CONCLUSIONS: The superior trunk block provided noninferior analgesia compared with interscalene brachial plexus block for up to 24 h after arthroscopic shoulder surgery and resulted in significantly less hemidiaphragmatic paresis.

Methods to Improve Arthroscopic and Orthopaedic Biomechanical Investigations: A Few of Our Favorite Things.

Controlled biomechanical studies, generally in vitro (and often ex vivo), may represent a first step in evaluation of a new arthroscopic or orthopedic implant or technique. The purpose and methods of biomechanical studies must be thoughtfully considered to achieve results translatable to a clinically relevant conclusion. A limitation is that with the exception of animal studies or rare human investigations, most biomechanical studies actually only investigate mechanics and do not study biological healing. We review tips and pearls for performing quality biomechanical investigations.

Our Measure of Medical Research Should Be Appreciable Benefit to the Patient.

The clinical relevance of research is much more important than statistical significance. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) are the strongest determinants of satisfaction as the result of an intervention or treatment. Outcomes can be measured in terms of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) detectable by a patient, bearing in mind that "detectable" includes worsening as well as improvement. Patient-acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) ultimately correlate with whether patients are happy or willing to undergo an intervention again. These measures should not be reported in terms of group means, where outliers could distort the score. These measures should be reported in terms of the proportion of individual patients whose scores cross the meaningful thresholds of satisfaction.

Virtual reality hip arthroscopy simulator demonstrates sufficient face validity.

PURPOSE: To test the face validity of the hip diagnostics module of a virtual reality hip arthroscopy simulator. METHODS: A total of 25 orthopaedic surgeons, 7 faculty members and 18 orthopaedic residents, performed diagnostic supine hip arthroscopies of a healthy virtual reality hip joint using a 70° arthroscope. Twelve specific targets were visualised within the central compartment; six via the anterior portal, three via the anterolateral portal and three via the posterolateral portal. This task was immediately followed by a questionnaire regarding the realism and training capability of the system. This consisted of seven questions addressing the verisimilitude of the simulator and five questions addressing the training environment of the simulator. Each question consisted of a statement stem and 10-point Likert scale. Following similar work in surgical simulators, a rating of 7 or above was considered an acceptable level of realism. RESULTS: The diagnostic hip arthroscopy module was found to have an acceptable level of realism in all domains apart from the tactile feedback received from the soft tissue. 23 out of 25 participants (92%) felt the simulator provided a non-threatening learning environment and 22 participants (88%) stated they enjoyed using the simulator. It was most frequently agreed that the level of trainees who would benefit most from the simulator were registrars and fellows (22 participants; 88%). Additionally, 21 of the participants (84%) agreed that this would be a beneficial training modality for foundation and core trainees, and 20 participants (80%) agreed that his would be beneficial for consultants. CONCLUSIONS: This VR hip arthroscopy simulator was demonstrated to have a sufficient level of realism, thus establishing its face validity. These results suggest this simulator has sufficient realism for use in the acquisition of basic arthroscopic skills and supports its use in orthopaedics surgical training. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

[Virtual arthroscopy : Gaming or training concept of the future]. / Virtuelle Arthroskopie : Computerspiel oder Weiterbildungskonzept der Zukunft?

Arthroscopy is a technically challenging surgical procedure with a relatively shallow learning curve compared to open procedures. To become an expert special cognitive and manual abilities have to be acquired and trained. The current situation in further medical education combined with the increasing economic pressure in the medical field does not leave enough room for a time-consuming training in arthroscopic techniques. A structured simulation training could be an alternative solution to this problem. The benefits of arthroscopic simulation training are meanwhile well documented. The complex tasks that an expert carries out during arthroscopy can be fragmented into more simple and elementary exercises and can be trained in a stress-free environment outside the operation room. An essential advantage of simulation training is the assessment of objective measurement parameters during the individual exercises. These parameters can be used to evaluate the learning process and performance of arthroscopic tasks. The aim of this review is to reflect the current state of simulation technology in arthroscopy and to show how simulator training can be meaningfully and effectively integrated into arthroscopic further training, exemplified by a modern medical further education concept.

Open versus arthroscopic Latarjet procedures for the treatment of shoulder instability: a systematic review of comparative studies.

BACKGROUND: The arthroscopic and open Latarjet procedures are both known to successfully treat shoulder instability with high success rates. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes and positioning of the coracoid graft and screws between the arthroscopic and open Latarjet procedures. METHODS: The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched for relevant studies between database creation and 2018. Only studies directly comparing open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures were included. RESULTS: There were 8 included studies, with a total of 580 patients treated arthroscopically and 362 patients treated with an open Latarjet procedure. Several papers found significantly better standardized outcome scores for either the open or arthroscopic procedure but these findings were not consistent across papers. Patients treated with arthroscopic Latarjet procedures had significantly lower initial post-operative pain, however pain scores became equivalent by one month post-operatively. Three of the five included studies found no significant difference in the coracoid graft positioning and two of three included studies found no significant difference in screw divergence angles between the two techniques. Arthroscopic procedures (112.2 min) appear to take, on average, longer than open procedures (93.3 min). However, operative times and complication rates decrease with surgeon experience with the arthroscopic procedure. Overall 3.8% of the patients treated arthroscopically and 6.4% of the patients treated with the open procedure went on to have post-operative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Both open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures can be used to effectively treat shoulder instability with similarly low rates of complications, recurrent instability and need for revision surgery. Arthroscopic Latarjet procedures are associated with less early post-operative pain but require increased operative time. The evidence does not support there being any significant difference in graft or screw positioning between the two techniques. At this time neither procedure shows clear superiority over the other.

A controlled before-after study to evaluate the effect of a clinician led policy to reduce knee arthroscopy in NSW.

BACKGROUND: Clinical evidence shows knee arthroscopy has little benefit for degenerative conditions and considerable variation in the incidence of knee arthroscopy in Australia has been identified. This study aimed to evaluate a clinician-led evidence-based policy which was implemented in one local health district in New South Wales (NSW) in 2012 to reduce the use of knee arthroscopy for patients aged 50 years or over. METHODS: Trends in rates and volume of knee arthroscopy for patients 50 years or over in NSW between 2004 and 2015 by district were examined. Changes at four hospitals that adopted the policy were assessed by a quasi-experimental before and after study design with control groups, using the generalised estimating equations (GEE) Poisson model. Each case hospital was matched with four control hospitals in terms of the volume of knee arthroscopy surgeries performed in the five years prior to the intervention. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2015, the number of knee arthroscopies in NSW initially increased and then decreased after 2011, with considerable variation across districts. While an overall reducing trend in NSW was observed between 2011 and 2015 (39%), a 58% reduction (95% CI: 55-62%) was found in the intervention district, including the private sector, being the greatest reduction found in all districts. The GEE Poisson results show that, compared with control hospitals, the number of knee arthroscopy was significantly reduced by 56% (95% CI: 11%-79%) at four hospitals that adopted the policy during the follow-up period (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians in one local health district initiated a policy to restrict knee arthroscopy for patients aged 50 years or over, which may explain the greater reduction seen in that district compared to all others, despite an overall decrease noted in the state. A significant reduction found at intervened hospitals proved the effect of the policy, suggesting that the implementation of a simple clinical governance process may help reduce inappropriate surgery.

Biomechanical evaluation of an arthroscopic transosseous repair as a revision option for failed rotator cuff surgery.

BACKGROUND: The number of revision rotator cuff cases is increasing. The literature is lacking guidance or biomechanical evaluation for fixation strength in a revision case scenario. Therefore, the aim of the study was to provide biomechanical data investigating primary fixation strength of a transosseous technique after anchor pullout failure of a single row reconstruction. It was hypothesized that an arthroscopic transosseous repair system as a procedure for rotator cuff revisions is providing equivalent stability compared to a primary single row suture anchor fixation due to change of fixation site. METHODS: Eight matched pairs (n = 16) of fresh frozen human shoulders were tested. The paired specimen shoulders were randomly divided into two repair groups (A single row and B primary transosseous repair). The potted specimens were mounted onto the Servohydraulic test system. Both groups were tested under cyclic loading followed by load to failure testing. Suture anchor repair shoulders (group A) that were tested to failure underwent a revision transosseous repair and were subsequently tested again using the same setup and protocol (group C). RESULTS: The mean native footprint areas did not show a significant difference between groups. The reconstructed footprint area showed a significantly greater coverage in favor of the transosseous repair. Ultimate load to failure of reconstructions with the primary anchor fixation (344.73 N ± 63.19) and the primary transosseous device (375.36 N ± 70.27) was not significantly higher compared to the revision repair (332.19 N ± 119.01 p = 0.45, p = 0.53). CONCLUSION: The tested transosseous anchor device is a suitable option to widely used suture anchors, providing equivalent fixation properties even in a revision case scenario. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Basic Science Study, Biomechanics.

Efficacy of standardized training on a virtual reality simulator to advance knee and shoulder arthroscopic motor skills.

BACKGROUND: Most studies demonstrated, that training on a virtual reality based arthroscopy simulator leads to an improvement of technical skills in orthopaedic surgery. However, how long and what kind of training is optimal for young residents is unknown. In this study we tested the efficacy of a standardized, competency based training protocol on a validated virtual reality based knee- and shoulder arthroscopy simulator. METHODS: Twenty residents and five experts in arthroscopy were included. All participants performed a test including knee -and shoulder arthroscopy tasks on a virtual reality knee- and shoulder arthroscopy simulator. The residents had to complete a competency based training program. Thereafter, the previously completed test was retaken. We evaluated the metric data of the simulator using a z-score and the Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool (ASSET) to assess training effects in residents and performance levels in experts. RESULTS: The residents significantly improved from pre- to post training in the overall z-score: - 9.82 (range, - 20.35 to - 1.64) to - 2.61 (range, - 6.25 to 1.5); p < 0.001. The overall ASSET score improved from 55 (27 to 84) percent to 75 (48 to 92) percent; p < 0.001. The experts, however, achieved a significantly higher z-score in the shoulder tasks (p < 0.001 and a statistically insignificantly higher z-score in the knee tasks with a p = 0.921. The experts mean overall ASSET score (knee and shoulder) was significantly higher in the therapeutic tasks (p < 0.001) compared to the residents post training result. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a competency based simulator training with this specific device for 3-5 h is an effective tool to advance basic arthroscopic skills of resident in training from 0 to 5 years based on simulator measures and simulator based ASSET testing. Therefore, we conclude that this sort of training method appears useful to learn the handling of the camera, basic anatomy and the triangulation with instruments.

My Kind of Town (Chicago Is): Content Collections Optimize Learning Related to the 2018 AANA Annual Meeting.

The 2018 Arthroscopy Association of North America Annual Meeting represents an opportunity to deepen one's understanding of a wide variety of topics. Arthroscopy journal readers have diverse practices and interests, and the meeting is designed to accommodate individual needs. The constructivist learning theory provides that scholars learn in many different ways. Thus, to enrich your learning experience, selected recently published Arthroscopy articles are suggested to supplement material presented at the meeting. The articles are collated on our web site in Content Collections, to allow meeting participants to prepare and to allow those unable to attend to remain engaged. We offer suggestions and encourage readers to customize their own learning experience.

Fundamentals of Arthroscopic Surgery Training Program Improves Knee Arthroscopy Simulator Performance in Arthroscopic Trainees.

PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness of a nonanatomic simulator in developing basic arthroscopy motor skills transferable to an anatomic model. METHODS: Forty-three arthroscopy novice individuals currently enrolled in medical school were recruited to perform a diagnostic knee arthroscopy using a high-fidelity virtual reality arthroscopic simulator providing haptic feedback after viewing a video of an expert performing an identical procedure. Students were then randomized into an experimental or control group. The experimental group then completed a series of self-guided training modules using the fundamentals of arthroscopy simulator training nonanatomic modules including camera centering, tracking, periscoping, palpation, and collecting stars in a three-dimensional space. Both groups completed another diagnostic knee arthroscopy between 1 and 2 weeks later. Camera path length, time, tibia and femur cartilage damage, as well as a composite score were recorded by the simulator on each attempt. RESULTS: The experimental group (n = 22) showed superior performance in composite score (30.09 vs 24, P = .046) and camera path length (71.51 cm vs 109.07 cm, P = .0274) at the time of the second diagnostic knee arthroscope compared with the control group (n = 21). The experimental group also showed significantly greater improvement in composite score between the first and second arthroscopes compared with the control group (14.27 vs 4.95, P < .01). Femoral and tibial cartilage damage were not significantly improved between arthroscopy attempts (-0.86% vs -1.45%, P = .40) and (-1.10 vs -1.27%, P = .83), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The virtual reality-based fundamentals of arthroscopy simulator training nonanatomic simulator is beneficial in developing basic motor skills in arthroscopy novice individuals resulting in significantly greater composite performance in an anatomic knee model. Based on the results of this study, it appears that there may be benefit from nonanatomic simulators in general as part of an arthroscopy training program. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, randomized trial.

Inter-rater Reliability for Metrics Scored in a Binary Fashion-Performance Assessment for an Arthroscopic Bankart Repair.

PURPOSE: To determine the inter-rater reliability (IRR) of a procedure-specific checklist scored in a binary fashion for the evaluation of surgical skill and whether it meets a minimum level of agreement (≥0.8 between 2 raters) required for high-stakes assessment. METHODS: In a prospective randomized and blinded fashion, and after detailed assessment training, 10 Arthroscopy Association of North America Master/Associate Master faculty arthroscopic surgeons (in 5 pairs) with an average of 21 years of surgical experience assessed the video-recorded 3-anchor arthroscopic Bankart repair performance of 44 postgraduate year 4 or 5 residents from 21 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education orthopaedic residency training programs from across the United States. RESULTS: No paired scores of resident surgeon performance evaluated by the 5 teams of faculty assessors dropped below the 0.8 IRR level (mean = 0.93; range 0.84-0.99; standard deviation = 0.035). A comparison between the 5 assessor groups with 1 factor analysis of variance showed that there was no significant difference between the groups (P = .205). Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient revealed a strong and statistically significant negative correlation, that is, -0.856 (P < .000), indicating that as intra-operative error rate scores increased, the IRR decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopy Association of North America shoulder faculty raters from across the United States showed high levels of IRR in the assessment of an arthroscopic 3-anchor Bankart repair procedure. All paired assessments were above the 0.8 level and the mean IRR of all resident assessments was 0.93, indicating that they could be used for high-stakes decisions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: With the move toward outcomes-based performance evaluation for graduate medical education, high-stakes assessments of surgical skill will require robust, reliable measurement tools that are able to withstand challenge. Surgical checklists employing metrics scored in a binary fashion meet the need and can show a high (>80%) IRR.

Level of evidence and authorship trends of clinical studies in knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy, 1995-2015.

PURPOSE: There is increasing emphasis on publication quality and internationalization of author groups in orthopaedic literature. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the type of studies and the level of evidence (LOE) published in knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy (KSSTA) from 1995 to 2015. The secondary aim was to analyze trends in authorship characteristics in KSSTA. METHODS: Two reviewers reviewed the table of contents of KSSTA and identified original papers from 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. The reviewers graded LOE from Levels I to IV using guidelines from the University of Oxford's Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. For each article, the total number of authors and country of author group were also analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 880 papers were analyzed. The proportions in LOE have stayed consistent throughout the study period (n.s.). There has been a significant increase in the number of published articles and the number of Level I and II studies (P < 0.01). Therapeutic articles were the most common type. The mean number of authors per KSSTA article significantly increased from 3.9 to 5.7 over the 20-year period (P < 0.01). The number of represented countries increased yearly and academic institutions from 40 different nationalities published articles in the Journal. Of the examined years, the percent of articles with international collaboration was 17.6%. CONCLUSION: The proportion of LOE I and II articles published in KSSTA remains consistently high. Therapeutic studies are the most frequently published articles. There is an increase in international groups publishing in KSSTA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.