The Efficacy of Arthroscopic Simulation Training on Clinical Ability: A Systematic Review.

Purpose: To examine the effect of arthroscopic simulator training on technical performance in a human model.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Literature searches of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were conducted using combinations of the terms virtual, digital, computer, reality, simulation, arthroscopy, training, learning, and education. Studies were considered for inclusion if they tested the effect of arthroscopic simulator training in a randomized controlled fashion, performed testing in a cadaver or live patient, and used explicit outcome measures of technical skill. Data from studies were extracted and study characteristics and outcomes were reviewed. The primary outcome measure was the number of studies in which the simulation trained group had significantly improved performance results relative to the control group in ≥50% of all measured outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane's Collaboration Tool.

Results: Twelve studies, including 340 total study participants, were included for review. Eight studies showed improved performance of the simulation trained group relative to the control group in ≥50% of assessed outcomes. Six of ten studies reporting completion time, three of six studies reporting task checklist completion, 3 of 7 studies reporting global rating scales, and 1 of 4 studies reporting Arthroscopic Surgical Skill Evaluation Tool scores showed improved performance of the simulation group relative to the control group for the respective outcome measures.

Conclusions: The literature is limited due to heterogeneity, both in type and merit, of the outcome measures that have been used to assess the transfer validity of arthroscopic simulator training to clinical performance. Despite the limitations of the literature, this review demonstrates that arthroscopic simulator training has potential to improve clinical performance.

Level Of Evidence: II, systematic review of Level II studies.