Circumventing Acute Compartment Syndrome: Outcomes from a Cadaver-based Course in Fasciotomy Procedural Skills.

Acute compartment syndrome (ACS) represents a surgical emergency requiring effective, complete fasciotomy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate cadaver-based training on the ability of practicing general surgeons to effectively perform upper extremity, thigh, and leg fasciotomies. One hundred seventeen general surgeons underwent a 2-day, cadaver-based course with formative and summative assessments based on validated scoring tools. Overall performance and critical item scores were recorded and compared utilizing analysis of variance with repeated measures and eta-squared values to evaluate effect size. For all three procedures, post-training scores were significantly improved when compared with pre-training scores (p < 0.001). Mean pre-training score for lower leg fasciotomy met the standard for competent performance of the procedure (total score > 80), whereas neither thigh nor upper extremity performance scores met this standard before training. This 2-day, cadaver-based course improves the ability of practicing general surgeons to effectively and independently perform upper extremity, thigh, and lower leg fasciotomies. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 32(4):238-241, 2023).

Knowledge gain of the non-vascular surgeons after attending a course on traumatic vascular emergencies.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the effectiveness of the workshop in enhancing the knowledge and skills of the non-vascular surgeons in dealing with traumatic vascular emergencies. METHODOLOGY: It was a Quasi-experimental pre-post design study conducted at Section of Vascular Surgery, Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi (Pakistan) in February 2019. One-day workshop was conducted to enhance the knowledge and operative skills of the non-vascular surgeons in managing traumatic vascular emergencies. A written test and course evaluation survey were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the course in achieving the desired objectives. RESULTS: Total of 21 participants attended the workshop with mean age of 29 ± 6.06 years. Majority of participants 15 (71%) were surgery residents from different subspecialties. Only 3 (14%) had prior exposure in Vascular Surgery. Mean pretest score was 11.9 ± 4.27 (59.52% ± 21.3) which improved to 16.14 ± 3.69 (81.6% ± 16.6). Gain in knowledge was measured using paired t-test and there was 21% of gain in knowledge of the participants compared between the pretest and posttest score. Overall participants found this workshop to be very useful in refining their skills and learning innovative techniques in managing vascular emergencies. CONCLUSIONS: Carefully designed workshop improves the knowledge of non-vascular surgeons in dealing with common vascular emergencies.

Fasciotomy Improvement Through Recognition of Errors Course: A Focused Needs Assessment for Error Management Training for Lower Extremity Fasciotomy Performance.

BACKGROUND: Many injuries from recent wars involve extremity trauma secondary to blasts, which predispose patients to developing extremity compartment syndrome. In military studies, 17% of fasciotomies required revision on arrival to a Role 4 hospital, and 41% of these had missed compartments, which is similar to that seen in civilian centers. While training has decreased this rate to 8%, this number is still too high. We conducted a focused needs assessment to guide the development of lower-extremity fasciotomy training. METHODS: In a predeployment assessment, 42 military surgeons performed a 2-incision, 4-compartment, lower-extremity fasciotomy on simulated lower leg models. Models were assessed for standardized and objectively-assessed major (inadequate skin or fascial incisions, missed compartments) and minor (failure to make an H-shaped incision over the lateral compartments, division of the greater saphenous vein) errors based on joint Trauma System clinical practice guidelines and approved training curricula. RESULTS: Four of 42 (9.5%) models contained no errors. Models averaged 4.3 ± 2.6 major and 0.3 ± 0.5 minor errors. 11 models (26.2%) had at least one missed compartment. The most common missed compartments were the deep posterior (17%) and anterior (14%). 29 (69%) had inadequate or poorly-placed skin incisions, with the most common being inadequate distal extension of the medial (10, 24%) and lateral (14, 33%) incisions, inadequate proximal extension of the lateral incision (6, 14%), medial incision too close to the tibia (7, 17%), and lateral incision over or behind the fibula (12, 29%). A total of 36 (86%) had inadequate fascial incisions. Inadequate fasciotomies were seen in the anterior (57%), lateral (55%), superficial (52%), and deep (34%) posterior compartments CONCLUSIONS: Performance on the models approximates what has been seen in military and civilian settings. This needs assessment will inform development of a simulation curriculum based on error-management and mastery learning theory to reduce the morbidity of lower-extremity compartment syndrome.

Head-camera video recordings of trauma core competency procedures can evaluate surgical resident's technical performance as well as colocated evaluators.

BACKGROUND: Unbiased evaluation of trauma core competency procedures is necessary to determine if residency and predeployment training courses are useful. We tested whether a previously validated individual procedure score (IPS) for individual procedure vascular exposure and fasciotomy (FAS) performance skills could discriminate training status by comparing IPS of evaluators colocated with surgeons to blind video evaluations. METHODS: Performance of axillary artery (AA), brachial artery (BA), and femoral artery (FA) vascular exposures and lower extremity FAS on fresh cadavers by 40 PGY-2 to PGY-6 residents was video-recorded from head-mounted cameras. Two colocated trained evaluators assessed IPS before and after training. One surgeon in each pretraining tertile of IPS for each procedure was randomly identified for blind video review. The same 12 surgeons were video-recorded repeating the procedures less than 4 weeks after training. Five evaluators independently reviewed all 96 randomly arranged deidentified videos. Inter-rater reliability/consistency, intraclass correlation coefficients were compared by colocated versus video review of IPS, and errors. Study methodology and bias were judged by Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies criteria. RESULTS: There were no differences (p ≥ 0.5) in IPS for AA, FA, FAS, whether evaluators were colocated or reviewed video recordings. Evaluator consistency was 0.29 (BA) - 0.77 (FA). Video and colocated evaluators were in total agreement (p = 1.0) for error recognition. Intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.73 to 0.92, dependent on procedure. Correlations video versus colocated evaluations were 0.5 to 0.9. Except for BA, blinded video evaluators discriminated (p < 0.002) whether procedures were performed before training versus after training. Study methodology by Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument criteria scored 15.5/19, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 showed low bias risk. CONCLUSION: Video evaluations of AA, FA, and FAS procedures with IPS are unbiased, valid, and have potential for formative assessments of competency. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level II.

Performance of Vascular Exposure and Fasciotomy Among Surgical Residents Before and After Training Compared With Experts.

Importance: Surgical patient outcomes are related to surgeon skills. Objective: To measure resident surgeon technical and nontechnical skills for trauma core competencies before and after training and up to 18 months later and to compare resident performance with the performance of expert traumatologists. Design, Setting, and Participants: This longitudinal study performed from May 1, 2013, through February 29, 2016, at Maryland State Anatomy Board cadaver laboratories included 40 surgical residents and 10 expert traumatologists. Interventions: Performance was measured during extremity vascular exposures and lower extremity fasciotomy in fresh cadavers before and after taking the Advanced Surgical Skills for Exposure in Trauma (ASSET) course. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome variable was individual procedure score (IPS), with secondary outcomes of IPSs on 5 components of technical and nontechnical skills, Global Rating Scale scores, errors, and time to complete the procedure. Two trained evaluators located in the same laboratory evaluated performance with a standardized script and mobile touch-screen data collection. Results: Thirty-eight (95%) of 40 surgical residents (mean [SD] age, 31 [2.9] years) who were evaluated before and within 4 weeks of ASSET training completed follow-up evaluations 12 to 18 months later (mean [SD], 14 [2.7] months). The experts (mean [SD] age, 52 [10.0] years) were significantly older and had a longer (mean [SD], 46 [16.3] months) interval since taking the ASSET course (both P < .001). Overall resident cohort performance improved with increased anatomy knowledge, correct procedural steps, and decreased errors from 60% to 19% after the ASSET course regardless of clinical year of training (P < .001). For 21 of 40 residents (52%), correct vascular procedural steps plotted against anatomy knowledge (the 2 IPS components most improved with training) indicates the resident's performance was within 1 nearest-neighbor classifier of experts after ASSET training. Five residents had no improvement with training. The Trauma Readiness Index for experts (mean [SD], 74 [4]) was significantly different compared with the trained residents (mean [SD], 48 [7] before training vs 63 [7] after training [P = .004] and vs 64 [6] 14 months later [P = .002]). Critical errors that might lead to patient death were identified by pretraining IPS decile of less than 0.5. At follow-up, frequency of resident critical errors was no different from experts. The IPSs ranged from 31.6% to 76.9% among residents for core trauma competency procedures. Modeling revealed that interval experience, rather than time since training, affected skill retention up to 18 months later. Only 4 experts and 16 residents (40%) adequately decompressed and confirmed entry into all 4 lower extremity compartments. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that ASSET training improved resident procedural skills for up to 18 months. Performance was highly variable. Interval experience after training affected performance. Pretraining skill identified competency of residents vs experts. Extremity vascular and fasciotomy performance evaluations suggest the need for specific anatomical training interventions in residents with IPS deciles less than 0.5.

Can hyper-realistic physical models of peripheral vessel exposure and fasciotomy replace cadavers for performance assessment?

BACKGROUND: Work-hour restrictions have reduced operative experience for residents. The Advanced Surgical Skills for Exposure in Trauma (ASSET) course fills this training gap. Cadaver use has limitations including cost and availability. Hyper-realistic synthetic models may provide an alternative to cadavers. We compared same surgeon performance between synthetic and cadaveric models to determine interchangeability for formative evaluation. METHODS: Forty residents (<4 weeks after ASSET) and 35 faculty (mean, 2.5 ± 1.3 years after ASSET) exposed axillary, brachial, and femoral arteries, and performed lower extremity fasciotomy. Separate evaluators and random starting order between models were used for participants. Individual procedure scores and aggregate procedure scores, a trauma readiness index, evaluated participants. Student's t and χ tests were used where appropriate. p Values less than 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: For same surgeons, faculty, but not residents, had higher trauma readiness index on the synthetic model (0.63 vs. 0.70, p < 0.01; 0.63 vs. 0.67, p = 0.06, respectively). Scores were not significantly different between models for residents except for the brachial artery exposure (0.68 vs. 0.75, p < 0.01), which was the least realistic of all procedures. Faculty did significantly better on the synthetic model in all procedures. All participants completed procedures nearly twice as quickly (5.61 ± 3.21 vs. 10.08 ± 4.66 minutes) and performed fewer errors on the synthetic model (113 vs. 53, p < 0.01; 118 vs. 76, p = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSION: Same surgeons performed procedures quicker and with fewer errors on the synthetic model. Residents performed similarly on both model types, this likely represents the unfamiliarity neophytes bring to new procedures. This suggests that the synthetic model, with easily discernible and standardized anatomy, may be useful in the early stages of training to understand critical procedural steps. The difficulty of the cadaver is more apt to assess and evaluate the experienced surgeon and identify opportunities for improvement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level III.

Vascular Trauma Operative Experience is Inadequate in General Surgery Programs.

BACKGROUND: Vascular injuries may be challenging, particularly for surgeons who have not received formal vascular surgery fellowship training. Lack of experience and improper technique can result in significant complications. The objective of this study was to examine changes in resident experience with operative vascular trauma over time. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed using Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) case logs of general surgery residents graduating between 2004 and 2014 at 2 academic, university-affiliated institutions associated with level 1 trauma centers. The primary outcome was number of reported vascular trauma operations, stratified by year of graduation and institution. RESULTS: A total of 112 residents graduated in the study period with a median 7 (interquartile range 4.5-13.5) vascular trauma cases per resident. Fasciotomy and exposure and/or repair of peripheral vessels constituted the bulk of the operative volume. Linear regression showed no significant trend in cases with respect to year of graduation (P = 0.266). Residents from program A (n = 53) reported a significantly higher number of vascular trauma cases when compared with program B (n = 59): 12.0 vs. 5.0 cases, respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Level 1 trauma center verification does not guarantee sufficient exposure to vascular trauma. The operative exposure in program B is reflective of the national average of 4.0 cases per resident as reported by the ACGME, and this trend is unlikely to change in the near future. Fellowship training may be critical for surgeons who plan to work in a trauma setting, particularly in areas lacking vascular surgeons.