Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Background: Previous simulation studies evaluated either dry lab (DL) or virtual reality (VR) simulation, correlating simulator training with the performance of arthroscopic tasks. However, these studies did not compare simulation training with specific surgical procedures.
Purpose/hypothesis: To determine the effectiveness of a shoulder arthroscopy simulator program in improving performance during arthroscopic anterior labral repair. It was hypothesized that both DL and VR simulation methods would improve procedure performance; however, VR simulation would be more effective based on the validated Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool (ASSET) Global Rating Scale.
Study Design: Controlled laboratory study.
Methods: Enrolled in the study were 38 orthopaedic residents at a single institution, postgraduate years (PGYs) 1 to 5. Each resident completed a pretest shoulder stabilization procedure on a cadaveric model and was then randomized into 1 of 2 groups: VR or DL simulation. Participants then underwent a 4-week arthroscopy simulation program and completed a posttest. Sports medicine-trained orthopaedic surgeons graded the participants on completeness of the surgical repair at the time of the procedure, and a single, blinded orthopaedic surgeon, using the ASSET Global Rating Scale, graded participants' arthroscopy skills. The procedure step and ASSET grades were compared between simulator groups and between PGYs using paired tests.
Results: There was no significant difference between the groups in pretest performance in either the procedural steps or ASSET scores. Overall procedural step scores improved after combining both types of simulator training ( = .0424) but not in the individual simulation groups. The ASSET scores improved across both DL ( = .0045) and VR ( = .0003), with no significant difference between the groups.
Conclusion: A 4-week simulation program can improve arthroscopic skills and performance during a specific surgical procedure. This study provides additional evidence regarding the benefits of simulator training in orthopaedic surgery for both novice and experienced arthroscopic surgeons. There was no statistically significant difference between the VR and DL models, which disproved the authors' hypothesis that the VR simulator would be the more effective simulation tool.
Clinical Relevance: There may be a role for simulator training in the teaching of arthroscopic skills and learning of specific surgical procedures.
