Cargando…
The Barrow Biomimetic Spine: Face, Content, and Construct Validity of a 3D-Printed Spine Model for Freehand and Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw Insertion
STUDY DESIGN: Description and evaluation of a novel surgical training platform. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the face, content, and construct validity of 5 novel surgical training models that simulate freehand and percutaneous (minimally invasive surgery [MIS]) pedicle sc...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6693063/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31448198 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218824080 |
_version_ | 1783443639434739712 |
---|---|
author | Bohl, Michael A. Mauria, Rohit Zhou, James J. Mooney, Michael A. DiDomenico, Joseph D. McBryan, Sarah Cavallo, Claudio Nakaji, Peter Chang, Steve W. Uribe, Juan S. Turner, Jay D. Kakarla, U. Kumar |
author_facet | Bohl, Michael A. Mauria, Rohit Zhou, James J. Mooney, Michael A. DiDomenico, Joseph D. McBryan, Sarah Cavallo, Claudio Nakaji, Peter Chang, Steve W. Uribe, Juan S. Turner, Jay D. Kakarla, U. Kumar |
author_sort | Bohl, Michael A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Description and evaluation of a novel surgical training platform. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the face, content, and construct validity of 5 novel surgical training models that simulate freehand and percutaneous (minimally invasive surgery [MIS]) pedicle screw placement. METHODS: Five spine models were developed by residents: 3 for freehand pedicle screw training (models A-C) and 2 for MIS pedicle screw training (models D and E). Attending spine surgeons evaluated each model and, using a 20-point Likert-type scale, answered survey questions on model face, content, and construct validity. Scores were statistically evaluated and compared using means, standard deviations, and analysis of variance between models and between surgeons. RESULTS: Among the freehand models, model C demonstrated the highest overall validity, with mean face (15.67 ± 5.49), content (19.17 ± 0.59), and construct (18.83 ± 0.24) validity all measuring higher than the other freehand models. For the MIS models, model D had the highest validity scores (face, content, and construct validity of 11.67 ± 3.77, 18.17 ± 2.04, and 17.00 ± 3.46, respectively). The 3 freehand models differed significantly in content validity scores (P = .002) as did the 2 MIS models (P < .001). The testing surgeons’ overall validity scores were significantly different for models A (P = .005) and E (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A 3-dimensional-printed spine model with incorporated bone bleeding and silicone rubber soft tissue was scored as having very high content and construct validity for simulating freehand pedicle screw insertion. These data has informed the further development of several surgical training models that hold great potential as educational adjuncts in surgical training programs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6693063 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66930632019-08-23 The Barrow Biomimetic Spine: Face, Content, and Construct Validity of a 3D-Printed Spine Model for Freehand and Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw Insertion Bohl, Michael A. Mauria, Rohit Zhou, James J. Mooney, Michael A. DiDomenico, Joseph D. McBryan, Sarah Cavallo, Claudio Nakaji, Peter Chang, Steve W. Uribe, Juan S. Turner, Jay D. Kakarla, U. Kumar Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Description and evaluation of a novel surgical training platform. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the face, content, and construct validity of 5 novel surgical training models that simulate freehand and percutaneous (minimally invasive surgery [MIS]) pedicle screw placement. METHODS: Five spine models were developed by residents: 3 for freehand pedicle screw training (models A-C) and 2 for MIS pedicle screw training (models D and E). Attending spine surgeons evaluated each model and, using a 20-point Likert-type scale, answered survey questions on model face, content, and construct validity. Scores were statistically evaluated and compared using means, standard deviations, and analysis of variance between models and between surgeons. RESULTS: Among the freehand models, model C demonstrated the highest overall validity, with mean face (15.67 ± 5.49), content (19.17 ± 0.59), and construct (18.83 ± 0.24) validity all measuring higher than the other freehand models. For the MIS models, model D had the highest validity scores (face, content, and construct validity of 11.67 ± 3.77, 18.17 ± 2.04, and 17.00 ± 3.46, respectively). The 3 freehand models differed significantly in content validity scores (P = .002) as did the 2 MIS models (P < .001). The testing surgeons’ overall validity scores were significantly different for models A (P = .005) and E (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A 3-dimensional-printed spine model with incorporated bone bleeding and silicone rubber soft tissue was scored as having very high content and construct validity for simulating freehand pedicle screw insertion. These data has informed the further development of several surgical training models that hold great potential as educational adjuncts in surgical training programs. SAGE Publications 2019-02-05 2019-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6693063/ /pubmed/31448198 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218824080 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Bohl, Michael A. Mauria, Rohit Zhou, James J. Mooney, Michael A. DiDomenico, Joseph D. McBryan, Sarah Cavallo, Claudio Nakaji, Peter Chang, Steve W. Uribe, Juan S. Turner, Jay D. Kakarla, U. Kumar The Barrow Biomimetic Spine: Face, Content, and Construct Validity of a 3D-Printed Spine Model for Freehand and Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw Insertion |
title | The Barrow Biomimetic Spine: Face, Content, and Construct Validity of a
3D-Printed Spine Model for Freehand and Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw
Insertion |
title_full | The Barrow Biomimetic Spine: Face, Content, and Construct Validity of a
3D-Printed Spine Model for Freehand and Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw
Insertion |
title_fullStr | The Barrow Biomimetic Spine: Face, Content, and Construct Validity of a
3D-Printed Spine Model for Freehand and Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw
Insertion |
title_full_unstemmed | The Barrow Biomimetic Spine: Face, Content, and Construct Validity of a
3D-Printed Spine Model for Freehand and Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw
Insertion |
title_short | The Barrow Biomimetic Spine: Face, Content, and Construct Validity of a
3D-Printed Spine Model for Freehand and Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw
Insertion |
title_sort | barrow biomimetic spine: face, content, and construct validity of a
3d-printed spine model for freehand and minimally invasive pedicle screw
insertion |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6693063/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31448198 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218824080 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bohlmichaela thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT mauriarohit thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT zhoujamesj thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT mooneymichaela thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT didomenicojosephd thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT mcbryansarah thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT cavalloclaudio thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT nakajipeter thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT changstevew thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT uribejuans thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT turnerjayd thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT kakarlaukumar thebarrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT bohlmichaela barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT mauriarohit barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT zhoujamesj barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT mooneymichaela barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT didomenicojosephd barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT mcbryansarah barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT cavalloclaudio barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT nakajipeter barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT changstevew barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT uribejuans barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT turnerjayd barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion AT kakarlaukumar barrowbiomimeticspinefacecontentandconstructvalidityofa3dprintedspinemodelforfreehandandminimallyinvasivepediclescrewinsertion |