ABSTRACT
Purpose: To compare the performance of the dominant and nondominant hand during fundamental arthroscopic simulator training. Methods: Surgical trainees who participated in a 2-day simulator training course between 2021 and 2023 were classified, according to their arthroscopic experience in beginners and competents. Only right-handed individuals with complete data sets were included in the study. Ambidexterity was trained using a box trainer (Fundamentals of Arthroscopic Surgery Training, Virtamed AG, Schlieren, Switzerland).Two tasks, periscoping for learning camera guidance and triangulation for additional instrument handling, were performed 4 times with the camera in the dominant hand and then in the nondominant hand. For each task, exercise time, camera path length, and instrument path length were recorded and analyzed. Results: Out of 94 participants 74 right-handed individuals (22 females, 52 males) were classified to novices (n = 43, less than 10 independently performed arthroscopies) and competents (n = 31, more than 10 independently performed arthroscopies). Competents performed significantly better than novices. No significant difference was found after changing the guiding hand for the camera from the dominant to the nondominant hand regarding the camera path length and the instrument path length. Notably, tasks were performed even faster when using the camera in the nondominant hand. Conclusions: Our data demonstrate that the learned manual skills during basic arthroscopic training are quickly transferred to the contralateral side. In consequence, additional fundamental skills training for camera guidance and instrument handling of the nondominant hand are not necessary. Clinical Relevance: For skillful arthroscopy, camera guidance and instrument handing must be equally mastered with both hands. It is important to understand how hand dominance may affect learning during arthroscopic simulator training.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: It is reasonable to question whether the case volume is a suitable proxy for the manual competence of an arthroscopic surgeon. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the number of arthroscopies previously performed and the arthroscopic skills acquired using a standardized simulator test. METHODS: A total of 97 resident and early orthopaedic surgeons who participated in arthroscopic simulator training courses were divided into five groups based on their self-reported number of arthroscopic surgeries: (1) none, (2) < 10, (3) 10 to 19, (4) 20 to 39 and (5) 40 to 100. Arthroscopic manual skills were evaluated with a simulator by means of the diagnostic arthroscopy skill score (DASS) before and after training. Seventy-five points out of 100 must be achieved to pass the test. RESULTS: In the pretest, only three trainees in group 5 passed the arthroscopic skill test, and all other participants failed. Group 5 (57 ± 17 points; n = 17) scored significantly higher than the other groups (group 1: 30 ± 14, n = 20; group 2: 35 ± 14, n = 24; group 3: 35 ± 18, n = 23; and group 4: 33 ± 17, n = 13). After a two-day simulator training, trainees showed a significant increase in performance. In group 5, participants scored 81 ± 17 points, which was significantly higher than the other groups (group 1: 75 ± 16; group 2: 75 ± 14; group 3: 69 ± 15; and group 4: 73 ± 13). While self-reported arthroscopic procedures were n.s. associated with higher log odds of passing the test (p = 0.423), the points scored in the pretest were found to be a good predictor of whether a trainee would pass the test (p < 0.05). A positive correlation was observed between the points scored in the pretest and the posttest (p < 0.05, r = 0.59, r2 = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: The number of previously performed arthroscopies is not a reliable indicator of the skills level of orthopaedic residents. A reasonable alternative in the future would be to verify arthroscopic proficiency on the simulator by means of a score as a pass-fail examination. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
