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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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