RESUMEN
Purpose: Modern surgical practice is continuously changing as technology develops. New techniques are often implemented after a surgeon has made the transition to independent clinical practice. There is therefore a need to 'retool' technical skills. Additionally, practicing surgeons must maintain and develop skills such as leadership, communication, critical thinking, teaching, and mentoring. Our aim was to perform a scoping review to assess the current status of simulation education for practicing Orthopedic Surgeons (OS). Methods: A 10 year search of PubMed, ERIC, and Web of Science was performed with a medical librarian. Controlled vocabulary Medical Subject Headings terms and natural language were developed with subject matter experts describing simulation, training and OS. Two trained reviewers evaluated all abstracts for inclusion. Exclusion criteria were articles that did not assess simulation education involving practicing OS. Data were extracted from the included full text articles by two reviewers: details of study design, type of participants, type of simulation and role of OS in the educational event. Results: Initial search identified 1824 articles of which 443 were duplicates, and 1381 articles were further screened. Of these, 1155 were excluded, 226 full text articles were assessed for eligibility and 80 included in analysis. Most were published in the last 6 years and from the United States. The majority (99%) described technical skill simulations (arthroscopy 56%, screw placement 23%, ligament reconstruction 19%). OS were rarely the only learners with 91% studies also having residents participate. OS were the targeted learner in 6% studies. OS provided content validity for 15 (19%) and construct validity in 59 (74%) studies. Conclusions: Simulation training to educate practicing OS is rare. OS are often used to validate work rather than being the center of an educational endeavor. A refocusing is needed to provide adequate training for practicing surgeons to retool skills as new techniques become available.
RESUMEN
Introduction: Advances in technology are changing surgical education. Simulation provides an important adjunct to operative experience. This pedagogy has arguably become more important in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, with resultant reduction in operative exposure for trainees. Virtual reality (VR) simulators may provide significant contribution to experiential learning; however, much of the investigative focus to date has, correctly, been on establishing validity evidence for these constructs. The aim of this work was to perform a scoping review to assess the current status of VR simulation education to determine curricular development efforts for orthopedic residents. Methods: With a trained medical librarian, searches of PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were conducted for all articles in the last 10 years (September 2011-September 2021). Controlled vocabulary Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and natural language developed with subject matter experts describing virtual reality or VR simulation and orthopedic training were used. Two trained reviewers evaluated all abstracts for inclusion. Exclusion criteria were all articles that did not assess VR simulation education involving orthopedic residents. Data were extracted from the included full-text articles including: study design, type of participants, type of VR simulation, simulated orthopedic skill, type of educational event, learner assessment including Kirkpatrick's level, assessment of quality using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI), and level of effectiveness (LoE). Results: Initial search identified 1,394 articles, of which 61 were included in the final qualitative synthesis. The majority (54%) were published in 2019- 2021, 49% in Europe. The commonest VR simulator was ArthroS (23%) and the commonest simulated skill was knee arthroscopy (33%). The majority of studies (70%) focused on simulator validation. Twenty-three studies described an educational module or curriculum, and of the 21 (34%) educational modules, 43% were one-off events. Most modules (18/21, 86%) assessed learners at Kirkpatrick level 2. With regard to methodological quality, 44% of studies had MERSQI 11.5-15 and 89% of studies had LoE of 2. Two studies had LoE of 3. Conclusion: Current literature pertaining to VR training for orthopedic residents is focused on establishing validity and rarely forms part of a curriculum. Where the focus is education, the majority are discrete educational modules and do not teach a comprehensive amalgam of orthopedic skills. This suggests focus is needed to embed VR simulation training within formal curricula efforts guided by the work of Kern, and assess the efficacy of these against patient outcomes.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This study sought to assess early clinical outcomes for knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients undergoing bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) treatment using a novel closed-end, fenestrated trocar (FT) that does not require centrifugation. METHODS: A prospective cohort of 17 knee OA patients undergoing BMAC treatment with the FT system from March 2018 to March 2019 was retrospectively evaluated. Approximately 10 mL of BMAC was harvested, no centrifugation was performed, and the BMAC was injected into the affected knee. Clinical outcomes were assessed at baseline, six weeks, and 12 weeks. This study has no affiliation with/vested-interest in the FT system. RESULTS: There were significant improvements in nearly all outcomes from baseline to 12 weeks. Specific improvements included Knee Injury and OA Outcome Score (KOOS) activities-of-daily-living (61.1 ± 9.2 [mean ± 95% confidence interval] to 89.3 ± 6, p = 0.001), quality-of-life (32.7 ± 9.3 to 66.1 ± 17.9, p = 0.003), sports/recreation (36.9 ± 10.6 to 72.6 ± 26.3, p = 0.006), and pain (53.8 ± 9.3 to 83 ± 10.2, p = 0.001); Lysholm scores (55.5 ± 8.4 to 77.3 ± 10.5, p = 0.009); and visual analog pain scores (5.68 ± 1.14 to 2.07 ± 1.86, p = 0.003). Individually, at least 75% of patients exhibited improvement in all KOOS categories at six weeks and at least 85% at 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: BMAC treatment with an FT system that does not require centrifugation resulted in significant improvements in early pain and function scores for knee OA. The symptomatic improvements in this study were similar to or greater than what has been reported using traditional needles. These data may provide clinicians with comfort in using an FT system and provide motivation for future randomized-controlled trials comparing aspiration techniques.
