Training and Assessment of Hysteroscopic Skills: A Systematic Review

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Mona Meral Savran ; BMSc^⁎ ; ^{mona_savran@hotmail.com" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} ; Stine Maya Dreier Sø ; rensen ; BMSc^⁎ ; Lars Konge ; MD ; PhD^⁎ ; Martin G. Tolsgaard ; MD ; PhD^⁎ ; ^&dagger ; ; Flemming Bjerrum ; MD^&Dagger ;
• 关键词：systematic review ; hysteroscopy ; assessment ; training ; simulation ; validity
• 刊名：Journal of Surgical Education
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：September-October 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：73
• 期：5
• 页码：906-918
• 全文大小：578 K

文摘

The aim of this systematic review was to identify studies on hysteroscopic training and assessment.

d="absSec_2">Design

d="sp0050">PubMed, Excerpta Medica, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched in January 2015. Manual screening of references and citation tracking were also performed. Studies on hysteroscopic educational interventions were selected without restrictions on study design, populations, language, or publication year. A qualitative data synthesis including the setting, study participants, training model, training characteristics, hysteroscopic skills, assessment parameters, and study outcomes was performed by 2 authors working independently. Effect sizes were calculated when possible. Overall, 2 raters independently evaluated sources of validity evidence supporting the outcomes of the hysteroscopy assessment tools.

d="absSec_3">Results

d="sp0055">A total of 25 studies on hysteroscopy training were identified, of which 23 were performed in simulated settings. Overall, 10 studies used virtual-reality simulators and reported effect sizes for technical skills ranging from 0.31 to 2.65; 12 used inanimate models and reported effect sizes for technical skills ranging from 0.35 to 3.19. One study involved live animal models; 2 studies were performed in clinical settings. The validity evidence supporting the assessment tools used was low. Consensus between the 2 raters on the reported validity evidence was high (94%).

d="absSec_4">Conclusions

d="sp0060">This systematic review demonstrated large variations in the effect of different tools for hysteroscopy training. The validity evidence supporting the assessment of hysteroscopic skills was limited.