Cargando…

Comparison of Summative Temporal Bone Dissection Scales Demonstrate Equivalence

Introduction  Temporal bone surgery is a unique and complicated surgical skill that requires extensive training. There is an educational requirement to maximize trainee experience and provide effective feedback. Objective  We evaluate three temporal bone dissection scales for efficacy, reliability,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hochman, Jordan B., Pisa, Justyn, Singh, Shubhi, Gousseau, Michael, Unger, Bert
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda. 2022
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9668416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36405459
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1740162
_version_ 1784831907621502976
author Hochman, Jordan B.
Pisa, Justyn
Singh, Shubhi
Gousseau, Michael
Unger, Bert
author_facet Hochman, Jordan B.
Pisa, Justyn
Singh, Shubhi
Gousseau, Michael
Unger, Bert
author_sort Hochman, Jordan B.
collection PubMed
description Introduction  Temporal bone surgery is a unique and complicated surgical skill that requires extensive training. There is an educational requirement to maximize trainee experience and provide effective feedback. Objective  We evaluate three temporal bone dissection scales for efficacy, reliability, and accuracy in identifying resident skill during temporal bone surgery. Methods  Residents of various skill levels performed a mastoidectomy with posterior tympanotomy on identic 3D-printed temporal bone models. Four blinded otologic surgeons evaluated each specimen at two separate intervals using three separate dissection scales: the Welling Scale (WS), the Iowa Temporal Bone Assessment Tool (ITBAT), and the CanadaWest Scale (CWS). Scores from each scale were compared in their ability to accurately separate residents by skill level, inter- and intrarater reliability, and efficiency in application. Results  Nineteen residents from 9 postgraduate programs participated. Assessment was clustered into junior (postgraduate year or PGY 1, 2), intermediate (PGY 3) and senior resident (PGY 4, 5) cohorts. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) found significant differences between cohort performance ( p  < 0.05) for all 3 scales considering the PGY level and the subjective account of temporal bone surgical experience. The inter-rater reliability was consistent across each scale. The intrarater reliability was comparable between the CWS (0.711) and the WS (0.713), but not the ITBAT (0.289). Time (in seconds) to complete scoring for each scale was also comparable between the CWS (42.7 ± 16.8), the WS (76.6 ± 14.5), and the ITBAT (105.6 ± 38.9). Conclusion  All three scales demonstrated construct validity and consistency in performance, and consideration should be given to judicious use in training.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9668416
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96684162022-11-17 Comparison of Summative Temporal Bone Dissection Scales Demonstrate Equivalence Hochman, Jordan B. Pisa, Justyn Singh, Shubhi Gousseau, Michael Unger, Bert Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol Introduction  Temporal bone surgery is a unique and complicated surgical skill that requires extensive training. There is an educational requirement to maximize trainee experience and provide effective feedback. Objective  We evaluate three temporal bone dissection scales for efficacy, reliability, and accuracy in identifying resident skill during temporal bone surgery. Methods  Residents of various skill levels performed a mastoidectomy with posterior tympanotomy on identic 3D-printed temporal bone models. Four blinded otologic surgeons evaluated each specimen at two separate intervals using three separate dissection scales: the Welling Scale (WS), the Iowa Temporal Bone Assessment Tool (ITBAT), and the CanadaWest Scale (CWS). Scores from each scale were compared in their ability to accurately separate residents by skill level, inter- and intrarater reliability, and efficiency in application. Results  Nineteen residents from 9 postgraduate programs participated. Assessment was clustered into junior (postgraduate year or PGY 1, 2), intermediate (PGY 3) and senior resident (PGY 4, 5) cohorts. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) found significant differences between cohort performance ( p  < 0.05) for all 3 scales considering the PGY level and the subjective account of temporal bone surgical experience. The inter-rater reliability was consistent across each scale. The intrarater reliability was comparable between the CWS (0.711) and the WS (0.713), but not the ITBAT (0.289). Time (in seconds) to complete scoring for each scale was also comparable between the CWS (42.7 ± 16.8), the WS (76.6 ± 14.5), and the ITBAT (105.6 ± 38.9). Conclusion  All three scales demonstrated construct validity and consistency in performance, and consideration should be given to judicious use in training. Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda. 2022-01-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9668416/ /pubmed/36405459 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1740162 Text en Fundação Otorrinolaringologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Hochman, Jordan B.
Pisa, Justyn
Singh, Shubhi
Gousseau, Michael
Unger, Bert
Comparison of Summative Temporal Bone Dissection Scales Demonstrate Equivalence
title Comparison of Summative Temporal Bone Dissection Scales Demonstrate Equivalence
title_full Comparison of Summative Temporal Bone Dissection Scales Demonstrate Equivalence
title_fullStr Comparison of Summative Temporal Bone Dissection Scales Demonstrate Equivalence
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Summative Temporal Bone Dissection Scales Demonstrate Equivalence
title_short Comparison of Summative Temporal Bone Dissection Scales Demonstrate Equivalence
title_sort comparison of summative temporal bone dissection scales demonstrate equivalence
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9668416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36405459
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1740162
work_keys_str_mv AT hochmanjordanb comparisonofsummativetemporalbonedissectionscalesdemonstrateequivalence
AT pisajustyn comparisonofsummativetemporalbonedissectionscalesdemonstrateequivalence
AT singhshubhi comparisonofsummativetemporalbonedissectionscalesdemonstrateequivalence
AT gousseaumichael comparisonofsummativetemporalbonedissectionscalesdemonstrateequivalence
AT ungerbert comparisonofsummativetemporalbonedissectionscalesdemonstrateequivalence