Impact of Simulation Training on Diagnostic Arthroscopy Performance: A Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE: To determine the impact of training on a virtual reality arthroscopy simulator on both simulator and cadaveric performance in novice trainees. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial of 28 participants without prior arthroscopic experience was conducted. All participants received a demonstration of how to use the ArthroVision Virtual Reality Simulator and were then randomized to receive either no training (control group, n = 14) or a fixed protocol of simulation training (n = 14). All participants took a pretest on the simulator, completing 9 tasks ranging from camera-steadying tasks to probing structures. The training group then trained on the simulator (1 time per week for 3 weeks). At week 4, all participants completed a 2-part post-test, including (1) performing all tasks on the simulator and (2) performing a diagnostic arthroscopy on a cadaveric knee and shoulder. An independent, blinded observer assessed the performance on diagnostic arthroscopy using the Arthroscopic Surgical Skill Evaluation Tool scale. To compare differences between non–normally distributed groups, the Mann-Whitney U test was used. An independent-samples t test was used for normally distributed groups. The Friedman test with pair-wise comparisons using Bonferroni correction was used to compare scores within groups at multiple time points. Bonferroni adjustment was applied as a multiplier to the P value; thus, the α level remained consistent. Significance was defined as P < .05. RESULTS: In both groups, all tasks except task 5 (in which completion time was relatively fixed) showed a significant degree of correlation between task completion time and other task-specific metrics. A significant difference between the trained and control groups was found for post-test task completion time scores for all tasks. Qualitative analysis of box plots showed minimal change after 3 trials for most tasks in the training group. There was no statistical correlation between the performance on diagnostic arthroscopy on either the knee or shoulder and simulation training, with no difference in Arthroscopic Surgical Skill Evaluation Tool scores in the training group compared with controls. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that an early ceiling effect is shown on the evaluated arthroscopic simulator model and that additional training past the point of proficiency on modern arthroscopic simulator models does not provide additional transferable benefits on a cadaveric model. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, randomized controlled trial.