PD58-09 OBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT AND STANDARD SETTING FOR FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPY SKILLS AMONG UROLOGY TRAINEES

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologySurgical Technology & Simulation: Training & Skills Assessment II1 Apr 2018PD58-09 OBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT AND STANDARD SETTING FOR FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPY SKILLS AMONG UROLOGY TRAINEES Mitchell Goldenberg, Michael Ordon, R John D'A Honey, Sero Andonian, and Jason Lee Mitchell GoldenbergMitchell Goldenberg More articles by this author , Michael OrdonMichael Ordon More articles by this author , R John D'A HoneyR John D'A Honey More articles by this author , Sero AndonianSero Andonian More articles by this author , and Jason LeeJason Lee More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.2797AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES With the increasing incidence of urolithiasis, the ability to perform flexible ureterorenoscopic surgery (fURS) is an important skill for all urologic surgery trainees. As training programs move toward a competency-based training model, we need to utilize objective assessment tools and set validated standards of competency. In this study, we assessed the technical skill of urology residents performing a basic fURS skill task to determine ways to objectively assess performance and to set valid standards of competency METHODS After REB approval, senior urology residents and faculty endourologists from across Canada were asked to perform a standardized fURS task (flexible ureterorenoscopy + repositioning of lower pole stones) on a fURS simulator (Cook Medical) using standardized equipment. All performances were video-recorded and blindly scored by both endourology experts and crowd-sourcing methods (CSATS) using a validated fURS rating tool. Resident and faculty scores by both expert and CSATS raters were compared. All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS v24. RESULTS A total of 44 participants (40 chief residents, 4 faculty) completed testing of which complete assessment data was available for 21 participants at the time of abstract submission. All residents reported having performed at least 25-50 fURS cases with 83% having performed over 50 fURS cases. All faculty participants had performed >500 fURS cases. Comparing residents to faculty, mean time to completion (sec) was 339s vs 158s (p=0.046) respectively. As assessed by blinded experts, all faculty participants were rated as “safe to perform independently” with a mean score (range 4 to 20) of 16.8 while only 56% of residents were rated as “safe to perform independently” with a mean score of 12.6 (p=0.04). The mean CSATS scores for residents and faculty was 12.4 vs 13.6 (p=0.38), respectively. Expert assessment scores correlated well with time to completion (r=–0.872, p<0.001), Pass/Fail ratings (r=0.859, p<0.001) and CSATS scores (r=0.798 (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS On a standardized, simulated flexible ureterorenoscopy task, faculty endourologists outperformed graduating urology residents in Canada as assessed by expert raters using a validated fURS assessment tool. Less than 60% of residents were rated as “safe to perform independently”. Crowd-sourced assessment (CSATS) scores correlated very well with expert assessments. Once all assessment data is available, we will now be able to set validated standards for fURS competency using both norm- and criterion-referenced methods. © 2018FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 199Issue 4SApril 2018Page: e1137 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2018MetricsAuthor Information Mitchell Goldenberg More articles by this author Michael Ordon More articles by this author R John D'A Honey More articles by this author Sero Andonian More articles by this author Jason Lee More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...