Cargando…

A systematic review of simulation-based training tools for technical and non-technical skills in ophthalmology

To evaluate all simulation models for ophthalmology technical and non-technical skills training and the strength of evidence to support their validity and effectiveness. A systematic search was performed using PubMed and Embase for studies published from inception to 01/07/2019. Studies were analyse...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Roxanne, Raison, Nicholas, Lau, Wai Yan, Aydin, Abdullatif, Dasgupta, Prokar, Ahmed, Kamran, Haldar, Shreya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7609318/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32203241
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41433-020-0832-1
_version_ 1783605006652407808
author Lee, Roxanne
Raison, Nicholas
Lau, Wai Yan
Aydin, Abdullatif
Dasgupta, Prokar
Ahmed, Kamran
Haldar, Shreya
author_facet Lee, Roxanne
Raison, Nicholas
Lau, Wai Yan
Aydin, Abdullatif
Dasgupta, Prokar
Ahmed, Kamran
Haldar, Shreya
author_sort Lee, Roxanne
collection PubMed
description To evaluate all simulation models for ophthalmology technical and non-technical skills training and the strength of evidence to support their validity and effectiveness. A systematic search was performed using PubMed and Embase for studies published from inception to 01/07/2019. Studies were analysed according to the training modality: virtual reality; wet-lab; dry-lab models; e-learning. The educational impact of studies was evaluated using Messick’s validity framework and McGaghie’s model of translational outcomes for evaluating effectiveness. One hundred and thirty-one studies were included in this review, with 93 different simulators described. Fifty-three studies were based on virtual reality tools; 47 on wet-lab models; 26 on dry-lab models; 5 on e-learning. Only two studies provided evidence for all five sources of validity assessment. Models with the strongest validity evidence were the Eyesi Surgical, Eyesi Direct Ophthalmoscope and Eye Surgical Skills Assessment Test. Effectiveness ratings for simulator models were mostly limited to level 2 (contained effects) with the exception of the Sophocle vitreoretinal surgery simulator, which was shown at level 3 (downstream effects), and the Eyesi at level 5 (target effects) for cataract surgery. A wide range of models have been described but only the Eyesi has undergone comprehensive investigation. The main weakness is in the poor quality of study design, with a predominance of descriptive reports showing limited validity evidence and few studies investigating the effects of simulation training on patient outcomes. More robust research is needed to enable effective implementation of simulation tools into current training curriculums.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7609318
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76093182020-11-05 A systematic review of simulation-based training tools for technical and non-technical skills in ophthalmology Lee, Roxanne Raison, Nicholas Lau, Wai Yan Aydin, Abdullatif Dasgupta, Prokar Ahmed, Kamran Haldar, Shreya Eye (Lond) Review Article To evaluate all simulation models for ophthalmology technical and non-technical skills training and the strength of evidence to support their validity and effectiveness. A systematic search was performed using PubMed and Embase for studies published from inception to 01/07/2019. Studies were analysed according to the training modality: virtual reality; wet-lab; dry-lab models; e-learning. The educational impact of studies was evaluated using Messick’s validity framework and McGaghie’s model of translational outcomes for evaluating effectiveness. One hundred and thirty-one studies were included in this review, with 93 different simulators described. Fifty-three studies were based on virtual reality tools; 47 on wet-lab models; 26 on dry-lab models; 5 on e-learning. Only two studies provided evidence for all five sources of validity assessment. Models with the strongest validity evidence were the Eyesi Surgical, Eyesi Direct Ophthalmoscope and Eye Surgical Skills Assessment Test. Effectiveness ratings for simulator models were mostly limited to level 2 (contained effects) with the exception of the Sophocle vitreoretinal surgery simulator, which was shown at level 3 (downstream effects), and the Eyesi at level 5 (target effects) for cataract surgery. A wide range of models have been described but only the Eyesi has undergone comprehensive investigation. The main weakness is in the poor quality of study design, with a predominance of descriptive reports showing limited validity evidence and few studies investigating the effects of simulation training on patient outcomes. More robust research is needed to enable effective implementation of simulation tools into current training curriculums. Nature Publishing Group UK 2020-03-13 2020-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7609318/ /pubmed/32203241 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41433-020-0832-1 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists 2020
spellingShingle Review Article
Lee, Roxanne
Raison, Nicholas
Lau, Wai Yan
Aydin, Abdullatif
Dasgupta, Prokar
Ahmed, Kamran
Haldar, Shreya
A systematic review of simulation-based training tools for technical and non-technical skills in ophthalmology
title A systematic review of simulation-based training tools for technical and non-technical skills in ophthalmology
title_full A systematic review of simulation-based training tools for technical and non-technical skills in ophthalmology
title_fullStr A systematic review of simulation-based training tools for technical and non-technical skills in ophthalmology
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review of simulation-based training tools for technical and non-technical skills in ophthalmology
title_short A systematic review of simulation-based training tools for technical and non-technical skills in ophthalmology
title_sort systematic review of simulation-based training tools for technical and non-technical skills in ophthalmology
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7609318/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32203241
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41433-020-0832-1
work_keys_str_mv AT leeroxanne asystematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT raisonnicholas asystematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT lauwaiyan asystematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT aydinabdullatif asystematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT dasguptaprokar asystematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT ahmedkamran asystematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT haldarshreya asystematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT leeroxanne systematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT raisonnicholas systematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT lauwaiyan systematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT aydinabdullatif systematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT dasguptaprokar systematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT ahmedkamran systematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology
AT haldarshreya systematicreviewofsimulationbasedtrainingtoolsfortechnicalandnontechnicalskillsinophthalmology