MP01-15 FACE, CONTENT, AND CONSTRUCT VALIDATION OF ENDOSCOPIC NEEDLE INJECTION (ENI) SIMULATOR FOR TRANSURETHRAL BULKING AGENT IN TREATMENT OF STRESS URINARY INCONTINENCE

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologySurgical Technology & Simulation: Training & Skills Assessment I1 Apr 2018MP01-15 FACE, CONTENT, AND CONSTRUCT VALIDATION OF ENDOSCOPIC NEEDLE INJECTION (ENI) SIMULATOR FOR TRANSURETHRAL BULKING AGENT IN TREATMENT OF STRESS URINARY INCONTINENCE Bilal Farhan, Gamal Ghoniem, and Rebecca Do Bilal FarhanBilal Farhan More articles by this author , Gamal GhoniemGamal Ghoniem More articles by this author , and Rebecca DoRebecca Do More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.121AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Endoscopic injection of urethral bulking agents is an office procedure that is used to treat stress urinary incontinence secondary to internal sphincteric deficiency. Validation studies are important in simulator evaluation. The ENI simulator has not been formally validated, although it has been used widely at University of California, Irvine. We aimed to demonstrate the descriptive analysis as a first step for the face, content, and construct validities of this simulator in the future. METHODS Dissected female porcine bladders were mounted in a modified Hysteroscopy Diagnostic Trainer (Figure 1). Using routine endoscopic equipment for this procedure with video monitoring, 6 urologists (experts group) and 6 urology trainee (novice group) completed urethral bulking agent injections on a total of 12 bladders using ENI simulator. Face and content validities were assessed by using structured quantitative survey which rating the realism. Construct validity was assessed, by comparing the performance of experts and novices, using Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills. Trainees also completed a post-procedure feedback survey. Effective injections were evaluated by measuring the retrograde urethral opening pressure, visual cystoscopic coaptation, and post-procedure gross anatomic examination. RESULTS All 12 participants felt the simulator was a good training tool and should be used as essential part of urology training (face validity). ENI simulator showed good face and content validity with average score varies between the experts and the novices was 3.9/5 and 3.8/5 respectively. Content validity evaluation showed that most aspects of the simulator were adequately realist (mean Likert scores 3.9-3.8/5). However, the bladder does not bleed, and sometimes thin. Experts significantly outperformed novices (P<001) across all measure of performance therefore establishing construct validity. CONCLUSIONS The ENI simulator shows face, content and construct validities, although few aspects of simulator were not very realist (e.g., bleeding). This study provides a base for the future formal validation for this simulator and for continuing use of this simulator in endourology training. © 2018FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 199Issue 4SApril 2018Page: e8 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2018MetricsAuthor Information Bilal Farhan More articles by this author Gamal Ghoniem More articles by this author Rebecca Do More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...