Microtools: A systematic review of validated assessment tools in microsurgery.

Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS(2022)

引用 1|浏览5
暂无评分
摘要
BACKGROUND:Microsurgery is a technically demanding aspect of surgery that is integral to a variety of sub-specialties. Microsurgery is required in high-risk cases where time is limited and pressure is high, so there is increasing demand for skills acquisition beforehand. The aim of this review was to analyse the available literature on validated microsurgical assessment tools. METHODS:Covidence was used to screen papers for inclusion. Keywords included 'microsurgery', 'simulation', 'end-product assessment' and 'competence'. Inclusion criteria specified simulation models which demonstrate training and assessment of skill acquisition simultaneously. Tools which were used for training independently of technical assessment were excluded and so were tools which did not include a microvascular anastomosis. Each assessment tool was evaluated for validity, bias, complexity and fidelity and reliability using PRISMA and SWiM guidelines. RESULTS:Thirteen distinct tools were validated for use in microsurgical assessment. These can be divided into overall assessment and end-product assessment. Ten tools assessed the 'journey' of the operation, and three tools were specifically end-product assessments. All tools achieved construct validity. Criterion validity was only assessed for the UWOMSA1 and GRS.2 Interrater reliability was demonstrated for each tool except the ISSLA3 and SAMS.4 Four of the tools addressed demonstrate predictive validity.4-7 CONCLUSION: Thirteen assessment tools achieve variable validity for use in microsurgery. Interrater reliability is demonstrated for 11 of the 13 tools. The GRS and UWOMSA achieve intrarater reliability. The End Product Intimal Assessment tool and the Imperial College of Surgical Assessment device were valid tools for objective assessment of microsurgical skill.
更多
查看译文
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要