Active Retrieval Improves Procedural Learning in Orthopedic Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Tests are shown to enhance learning: this is known as the "testing effect". The benefit of testing is theorized to be through "active retrieval", which is the effortful process of recalling stored knowledge. This differs from "passive studying", such as reading, which is a low effort process relying on recognition. The testing effect is commonly studied in random word list scenarios and is thought to disappear as complexity of material increases. Little is known about the testing effect in complex situations such as procedural learning. Therefore, we investigated if testing improves procedural learning of fracture fixation as compared to "passive studying". DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Fifty participants watched an instructional video of an open reduction internal fixation of a Sawbones™ femur. Participants then performed the procedure under guided supervision (pretest). After randomization, they either read the steps (passive studying group), or wrote down the steps from memory (active retrieval group) for a period of 15 minutes. After a washout period, all participants performed the procedure without guidance (posttest) and then once more, 1 week after the initial testing (retention test). The participants were assessed using the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill. Each performance was video recorded for data analysis purposes. RESULTS: Participants in the passive studying group had significantly higher Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill scores during immediate assessment compared to the active retrieval group (p = 0.001), especially with respect to remembering the correct order of the steps (p = 0.002). The percentage of information forgotten was significantly less in the active retrieval group (p = 0.02) at the retention test. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that, compared to passive studying, testing with active retrieval through writing resulted in better retention of fracture fixation knowledge (i.e., less forgetting). These findings can easily be applied and incorporated in existing curricula. Future studies are needed to determine the effects of different kinds of active retrieval methods such as verbal retrieval (e.g., dictating) in surgical practice.

Prevalence of osteoporosis in osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data are contradictory regarding the relationship between osteoarthritis (OA) and osteoporosis (OP) with some studies showing the increased risk of OP in OA. The study was conducted to determine whether OP prevalence is increased in patients with OA, compared to age and sex-matched population. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library (inception-2019) were searched for studies reporting the frequency, rate, prevalence, incidence, risk, or excess risk of OP in patients with OA compared to age and sex-matched population. Estimates were combined using a random effects model. Consistency was evaluated using the I2 statistic. Articles with fewer than 200 participants were excluded. Of 2772 articles, 49 had full article screening, and 8 articles met the inclusion criteria. Other articles reporting mean BMD and not OP were excluded. In women, 998 participants with OA were compared with 1903 controls. The pooled estimate of the odds ratio for prevalence of OP vs general matched population was not statistically different. In men, 136 participants with OA were compared with 682 controls. The results did not show a statistically significant difference in the frequency of OP in OA in men. According to the site of bone mineral density measurement, a higher prevalence of OP at lumbar spine was found in both men and women. The frequency of OP overall in participants with OA was not different, except for a higher prevalence of OP in lumbar spine in both men and women compared to the matched controls.