Validation of a bench-top training model for retrograde intrarenal surgery
Document Type
Article
Department
Urology
Abstract
Objective: To validate the in-house built Styrofoam box bench-top training model for retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS).
Materials and methods: This study was performed in the setting of a half-day RIRS course. During the course, participants performed RIRS on a locally built bench-top model. We recruited 26 participants, comprising 20 trainees and 6 experts. Trainees and experts were asked to fill a self-administered questionnaire assessing various components of RIRS to assess the face and content validity. For construct validity, experts using Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) rated trainees and the mean OSATS score of junior versus senior residents was compared.
Results: As per trainees, the model was 86% (4.3/5) realistic, which was backed by experts who found this model to be 87.6% (4.38/5) realistic. The overall face validity of the model was 86.4% (4.32/5). The overall content validity of this model was 83.4% (4.17/5). Majority of the participants thought that this tool is useful for learning technique (4.38 ± 0.49) and safe-conduct (4.31 ± 0.73) of the procedure. The trainees concurred that the skills acquired are transferable to the operating room (4.23 ± 0.76). However, the construct validity by comparing mean OSATS score of junior versus senior residents was 19.5 ± 3.5 and 23 ± 4.5. A p value of 0.11 could not be established.
Conclusion: This study has demonstrated the face, content, and construct validity of the bench-top training model for RIRS. Further evaluation is necessary to compare its effectiveness against other available models to demonstrate concurrent validity.
Publication (Name of Journal)
Urologia Internationalis
Recommended Citation
Hussain, S.,
Rana, R.,
Ather, H.
(2021). Validation of a bench-top training model for retrograde intrarenal surgery. Urologia Internationalis.
Available at:
https://ecommons.aku.edu/pakistan_fhs_mc_surg_urol/170
Comments
Volume, issue, and pagination are not provided by the author/publisher