Premium
SE02
THE VALIDITY OF AN INTEGRATED CLINICAL SIMULATOR FOR LEARNING LAPAROSCOPIC APPENDICECTOMY
Author(s) -
Windsor J. A.,
Loveday B.,
Oosthuizen G.,
Diener S.
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
anz journal of surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.426
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1445-2197
pISSN - 1445-1433
DOI - 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2007.04129_2.x
Subject(s) - medicine , construct validity , psychomotor learning , competence (human resources) , trainer , content validity , demographics , randomized controlled trial , physical therapy , face validity , medical education , cognition , surgery , psychometrics , psychology , clinical psychology , social psychology , demography , psychiatry , sociology , computer science , programming language
Purpose Attaining procedural competence requires a combination of specific cognitive and psychomotor skills. The Multimedia Clinical Skills Trainer (MCST, GoVirtual Medical Ltd) is software program that integrates text, anatomy, video and simulation for teaching a range of procedures. The purpose of this study was to determine the face, content and construct validity of MCST for laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA). Methodology The study was supported by the RACS. Basic surgical trainees (BST) in NZ were recruited and randomized into a control group and an intervention group. The latter received MCST for ad libitum use on their personal computers. Participant received three questionnaires: at the start of the study to determine demographics, at 2 weeks to assess knowledge and problem solving ability, and at four months to assess operative confidence and usefulness of MCST. Results Fifty‐eight BST’s were randomized. The first questionnaire was returned by 46% of participants, and third questionnaire by 44%. The intervention group scored more highly than the control group in the second questionnaire (14.69/20 vs 13.48/20). This difference was more apparent for first year BST’s (14.93/20 vs 12.13/20, p = 0.04). Operative confidence was similar at four months for the two groups. First year BST’s scored MCST more highly for its usefulness (5.2/7 vs 3.7/7, p = 0.04). Conclusions MCST has face, content and construct validity for BST’s learning LA, is a useful pre‐learning tool prior to clinical training opportunities, and can be used to measure knowledge and performance.